Reliability of measurements made on scanned cast models using the 3Shape R700 scanner

Lemos, L. S.; Crusoé‐Rebello, Iêda; Vogel, Carlos Jorge; Barbosa, M C

doi:10.1259/dmfr.20140337

Cited by 33 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, a significant difference in terms of trueness of scans produced with the IOS and the CBCT was noticed; this difference was greater (with higher deviations) in the mandibular models than in the maxillary models. In agreement with several studies reported in the literature [ 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ], our results confirm that the precision of OS was within an acceptable range. Even if these studies were able to prove the reliability of the OS for the digitalization of dental models, other reports have outlined its limitation in cases with improper dental alignment [ 21 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Comparative Evaluation of Digitization of Diagnostic Dental Cast (Plaster) Models Using Different Scanning Technologies

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rapidly developing digital dental technologies have substantially simplified the documentation of plaster dental models. The large variety of available scanners with varying degrees of accuracy and cost, however, makes the purchase decision difficult. This study assessed the digitization accuracy of a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and an intraoral scanner (IOS), as compared to a desktop optical scanner (OS). Ten plaster dental models were digitized three times (n = 30) with each scanner. The generated STL files were cross-compared, and the RMS values were calculated. Conclusions were drawn about the accuracy with respect to precision and trueness levels. The precision of the CBCT scanner was similar to the desktop OS reference, which both had a median deviation of 0.04 mm. The IOS had statistically significantly higher deviation compared to the reference OS, with a median deviation of 0.18 mm. The trueness values of the CBCT was also better than that of IOS—median differences of 0.14 and 0.17 mm, respectively. We conclude that the tested CBCT scanner is a highly accurate and user-friendly scanner for model digitization, and therefore a valuable alternative to the OS. The tested IOS was generally of lower accuracy, but it can still be used for plaster dental model digitization.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Comparative Evaluation of Digitization of Diagnostic Dental Cast (Plaster) Models Using Different Scanning Technologies

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The study protocol was determined to qualify for exempt status according to 45 CFR 46.101(b) by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (HSC-DB-17-0064). The scanner, which has been previously shown to be a reliable tool for creation of a digital file from a physical model, 16 was calibrated before scanning the plaster models. Each arch was scanned separately, resulting in 24 separate STL files.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of print layer height on the assessment of 3D-printed models

Loflin

English

Borders

et al. 2019

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Many variables can affect the accuracy of 3D-printed orthodontic models, and the effects of different printing parameters on the clinical utility of the printed models are just beginning to be understood. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of print layer height on the assessment of 3D-printed orthodontic models with the use of the American Board of Orthodontics Cast-Radiograph Evaluation grading system. Methods: Twelve cases were scanned using a desktop model scanner and 3D-printed using a stereolithography-based printer at three different layer heights (25, 50, and 100-mm; n 5 12 per group). All models were scored by eleven graders using the Cast-Radiograph Evaluation grading system. All models were scored a second time, at least two weeks later. Results: No statistically significant effects of print layer height were found on the scoring of the models for any of the grading metrics or total score. 3D-printed models of each layer height were highly positively correlated with stone models for the total score, with the strongest correlation found with models printed at 100-mm. Conclusions: 100-mm layer height 3D-printed models are potentially clinically acceptable for the purposes of evaluation of treatment outcomes, diagnosis and treatment planning, and residency training.

show abstract

“…The measurements are defined previously. 17,25 significant differences in patient anxiety and stress levels during the two procedures. An explanation of the findings in the present study might be that the accompanying parents' dental anxiety or general state of anxiety had affected the child.…”

Section: Patient Experiencementioning

confidence: 97%

“…On the digital models, the 3Shape software was used to measure the distances (OrthoSystems 2015-1, Version 1.6.1.10, Patch 10). The following four distances were registered in all three settings: 17 TC3: Distance between the cusp tips of the permanent upper canines TC6: Distance between the mesiofacial cusp tips of the permanent upper first molars TC6,3þ: Distance between the mesiofacial cusp tip of the permanent upper right first molar and the cusp tip of the permanent upper right canine TCþ3,6: Distance between the mesiofacial cusp tip of the permanent upper left first molar and the cusp tip of the permanent upper left canine…”

Section: Dental Arch Distancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of patient experience, chair-side time, accuracy of dental arch measurements and costs of acquisition of dental models

Glisic

Hoejbjerre

Sonnesen

2019

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare patient experience, chairside time, dental arch distances, and costs of dental models derived from intraoral scans and alginate impressions in pre-orthodontic children and young adolescents. Materials and Methods: Fifty-nine children and young adolescents (9–15 years, mean: 12.70 years) had an intraoral scan and an alginate impression prior to orthodontic treatment. During the procedures, chairside time was registered in minutes and patient experience was assessed by a Visual Analogue Scale questionnaire. Four maxillary dental arch distances were measured on digital models, on plaster casts, and directly in the mouth (intraoral). The cost of each procedure was presented graphically. Differences between the two procedures were tested by paired t-test and general linear model. Results: Patient experience was statistically better during intraoral scan compared with alginate impression regarding comfort, gag reflex, breathing, smell/sound, taste/vibration, and all statements concerning anxiety (P < .05). No significant difference in chairside time between the two procedures was found. No statistically significant differences in dental arch distances between digital models and plaster casts were found, but dental arch distances measured intraorally differed significantly from both digital models and plaster casts (P < .05). Cost calculation showed that the digital procedure was 10.7 times more expensive than the conventional procedure initially and, that after 3.6 years, the two procedures were equal in cost. Conclusions: Children preferred intraoral scan rather than alginate impression. Chairside time was equal for the two procedures as were the measurements of maxillary dental arch distances. The two procedures were equal in cost at 3.6 years.

show abstract

Reliability of measurements made on scanned cast models using the 3Shape R700 scanner

Cited by 33 publications

References 23 publications

Comparative Evaluation of Digitization of Diagnostic Dental Cast (Plaster) Models Using Different Scanning Technologies

Comparative Evaluation of Digitization of Diagnostic Dental Cast (Plaster) Models Using Different Scanning Technologies

Effect of print layer height on the assessment of 3D-printed models

A comparison of patient experience, chair-side time, accuracy of dental arch measurements and costs of acquisition of dental models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About