Comparison of accuracy and speed between plaster casting, high‐cost and low‐cost 3D scanners to capture foot, ankle and lower leg morphology of children requiring ankle‐foot orthoses

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundTraditional plaster‐cast fabrication of an ankle‐foot orthosis (AFO), although robust, is time‐consuming and cumbersome. 3D scanning is quickly gaining attention as an alternative to plaster casting the foot and ankle region for AFO fabrication. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy and speed of two high‐performing 3D scanners compared with plaster casting in pediatric patients requiring an AFO.MethodsTen participants (mean age 10.0 ± 3.9 years) prescribed AFOs for a movement disorder were 3D scanned with the high‐cost Artec Eva (Eva) and low‐cost Structure Sensor II (SSII) using one‐person (1p) and two‐person (2p) protocols. Accuracy and speed for both 3D scanners were compared with corresponding plaster cast measures (≤5% acceptable difference). Bland and Altman plots were generated to show mean bias and limits of agreement.ResultsOverall, Eva and SSII were accurate for foot, ankle, and lower leg key clinical landmarks (Eva‐1p: 4.4 ± 7.3%; Eva‐2p: 3.2 ± 7.5%; SSII‐1p: 0.6 ± 7.4%; SSII‐2p: 0.7 ± 8.2%). Bland and Altman plots for the SSII demonstrated lower biases for 1p (bias 0.5 mm, LoA: −12.4–13.5 mm) and 2p (0.4 mm, LoA: −11.4–12.2 mm) protocols compared with Eva for 1p (bias 2.3 mm, LoA: −8.0–12.7 mm) and 2p (1.8 mm, LoA: −10.7–14.3 mm) protocols. The SSII 2p protocol was the fastest 3D scanning method (26.4 ± 11.1 s).ConclusionsThe high‐cost Eva and low‐cost SSII 3D scanners using the 1p and 2p protocols produced comparable accuracy and faster capture of key clinical landmarks compared with plaster cast measures for the fabrication of AFOs in pediatric patients.