Does the traditional or digital dental model measurement method affect the results?: A validation study-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Does the traditional or digital dental model measurement method affect the results?: A validation study

Published:2023-08-31 Issue:2 Volume:50 Page:87-94
ISSN:2757-6744
Container-title:European Annals of Dental Sciences
language:
Short-container-title:

Author:

KARSLI Nurver¹^ORCID,YURDAKUL Zehra²^ORCID,GONCA Merve³^ORCID,ÇAVA Kutay⁴^ORCID

Affiliation:

1. KARADENIZ TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, FACULTY OF DENTISTRY, DENTISTRY PR.

2. KARADENIZ TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, FACULTY OF DENTISTRY

3. RECEP TAYYIP ERDOGAN UNIVERSITY, FACULTY OF DENTISTRY

4. KARADENIZ TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the accuracy, reliability and reproducibility of measurements made on digital models obtained using OrthoAnalyzer (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) and Materialize 3 matic (MIMICS , Leuven, Belgium) software by comparing them with measurements made on dental plaster models. Methods: The teeth of 50 individuals were measured and plaster models were obtained. In addition, digital images were obtained from the patients with Trios intraoral scanner. A total of 30 linear measurements were made using OrthoAnalyzer and Materialize 3 matic software, including the mesiodistal width of the teeth, arch perimeter, intercanine and intermolar distances. All measurements were made by two different examiners. For the first and second measurements of the first examiner, intraexaminer reliability was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), two way mixed model, consistency type. Results: The largest mean difference between Materialize 3 matic and caliper measurements was -0.136 mm in maxillary right first premolar and maxillary left lateral incisor. The smallest mean difference was 0.0029 mm in the mandibular left lateral incisor. In transverse measurements, the largest mean difference was found in the upper intercanine distance of 0.117 mm, and the smallest mean difference was 0.0086 mm in the upper intermolar distance. The largest mean difference between OrthoAnalyzer and caliper measurements was 0.107 mm in the maxillary right lateral incisor, and the smallest mean difference was 0.0049 mm in the maxillary left lateral incisor. Conclusions: Linear distance measurements with three-dimensional digital models are a valid, reliable and reproducible method compared to plaster models.

Publisher

Ankara University

Subject

General Materials Science

Reference21 articles.

1. 1. Naidu D, Freer TJ. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of the iOC intraoral scanner: a comparison of tooth widths and Bolton ratios. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013;144(2):304–310. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.04.011.

2. 2. Cuperus AMR, Harms MC, Rangel FA, Bronkhorst EM, Schols JG, Breuning KH. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Or- thop. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012;142(3):308–313. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.03.031.

3. 3. Bootvong K, Liu Z, McGrath C, Hägg U, Wong RW, Bendeus M, et al. Virtual model analysis as an alternative approach to plaster model analysis: reliability and validity. Eur J Orthod. 2010;32(5):589–595. doi:hhttps://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjp159.

4. 4. Camardella LT, Breuning H, de Vasconcellos Vilella O. Accuracy and reproducibility of measurements on plaster models and dig- ital models created using an intraoral scanner. J Orofac Orthop. 2017;78(3):211–220. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-016- 0070-0.

5. 5. Santoro M, Galkin S, Teredesai M, Nicolay OF, Cangialosi TJ. Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster mod- els. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003;124(1):101–105. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889-5406(03)00152-5.