A comparative evaluation of intraoral and extraoral digital impressions: An in vivo study

Abstract

The intraoral scanner showed higher "precision" and "trueness" values when compared with the extraoral scanner.

Comparative Study on Two Methods Used in Obtaining 3D Printed Dental Models

“…Ender et al (2019) [19], specifies that: "certain current IOS devices are well within the required accuracy required for full-arch scansˮ and -corresponding to partial-arch impressions -"IO scanninig represents a suitable alternative to conventional impression methodsˮ. The intraoral scanning is described by many authors as being able to provide greater accuracy of dental models, compared to the laboratory (extraoral) scanning or to the conventional method of obtaining dental models, represented by conventional oral impression [20,21,22,14]. Sason et al (2018) [20] presented an in vivo study performed on 10 clinically healthy patients, aged 18-45, highlighting that the intraoral scanner offers greater accuracy (precision and trueness) than the extraoral scanner.…”

“…The intraoral scanning is described by many authors as being able to provide greater accuracy of dental models, compared to the laboratory (extraoral) scanning or to the conventional method of obtaining dental models, represented by conventional oral impression [20,21,22,14]. Sason et al (2018) [20] presented an in vivo study performed on 10 clinically healthy patients, aged 18-45, highlighting that the intraoral scanner offers greater accuracy (precision and trueness) than the extraoral scanner. Intraoral scanners can be used, according to Nedelcu et al, (2018) [21], as "replacementsˮ of conventional impressions, when at most 10 dental units are prosthetically restored.…”

Evaluation of the Accuracy of Conventional and Digital Methods of Obtaining Dental Impressions

“…The polysulfides were created soon after, but due to the unpleasant odor and taste, they were not well accepted by the patients. In 1965, polyether was introduced as the first material developed specifically for dental impression, which had acceptable prey time, was hydrophilic and had excellent detail reproduction, however the models should be done within 48 h due to deformation the material underwent (Sason et al, 2018).…”

Die digitale intra- und extraorale Abformung

“…Eine mögliche Erklärung hierfür besteht in der Menge der generierten Punkte und der Überlagerung dieser Punkte in einem Datensatz, wobei eine Erhöhung der Anzahl zu berücksichtigender Aufnahmen eines Scanbereiches zu einer steigenden Unschärfe des resultierenden Datensatzes führen kann. [16]. In ihrer doppelt verblindeten und randomisierten klinischen Studie haben auch Ahrberg et al festgestellt, dass direkte intraorale digitale Abformtechniken genauer und zeiteffektiver sind als nicht digitale Vorgehensweisen [17].…”