Yoo, Jo-Kwang
(Department of Orthodontics, Gil Medical Center, Gachon University College of Medicine)
,
Kang, Yoon-Koo
(Department of Orthodontics, Gil Medical Center, Gachon University College of Medicine)
,
Lee, Su-Jung
(Department of Orthodontics, Gil Medical Center, Gachon University College of Medicine)
,
Kim, Seong-Hun
(Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University)
,
Moon, Cheol-Hyun
(Department of Orthodontics, Gil Medical Center, Gachon University College of Medicine)
Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the inter-arch relationship of digital models generated using two types of intraoral scanners. Methods: In total, 34 plaster model samples were used. Two corresponding digital models were created using two types of intraoral scanne...
Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the inter-arch relationship of digital models generated using two types of intraoral scanners. Methods: In total, 34 plaster model samples were used. Two corresponding digital models were created using two types of intraoral scanners. A total of 15 variables were measured. The plaster model was directly measured using a digital caliper, while the digital models were measured using a software. The accuracy of the measurements was evaluated using repeated measures analysis of variance and the Friedman test. Results: Among the 15 measurements, 6 measurements[Overjet, Overbite, DZ_11-41 (Distance between the gingival zenith of maxillary right central incisor and mandibular right central incisor), DZ_16-46 (Distance between the gingival zenith of maxillary right first molar and mandibular right first molar), DZ_13-33 (Distance between the gingival zenith of maxillary right canine and mandibular left canine), and DZ_23-43 (Distance between the gingival zenith of maxillary left canine and mandibular right canine)]showed statistically significant differences, with DZ_23-43 showing the largest difference of 0.18 mm. The other measurements showed no statistically significant differences. Conclusions: Regardless of the type of scanner used for preparation, digital models can be used as clinically acceptable alternatives to conventional plaster models.
Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the inter-arch relationship of digital models generated using two types of intraoral scanners. Methods: In total, 34 plaster model samples were used. Two corresponding digital models were created using two types of intraoral scanners. A total of 15 variables were measured. The plaster model was directly measured using a digital caliper, while the digital models were measured using a software. The accuracy of the measurements was evaluated using repeated measures analysis of variance and the Friedman test. Results: Among the 15 measurements, 6 measurements[Overjet, Overbite, DZ_11-41 (Distance between the gingival zenith of maxillary right central incisor and mandibular right central incisor), DZ_16-46 (Distance between the gingival zenith of maxillary right first molar and mandibular right first molar), DZ_13-33 (Distance between the gingival zenith of maxillary right canine and mandibular left canine), and DZ_23-43 (Distance between the gingival zenith of maxillary left canine and mandibular right canine)]showed statistically significant differences, with DZ_23-43 showing the largest difference of 0.18 mm. The other measurements showed no statistically significant differences. Conclusions: Regardless of the type of scanner used for preparation, digital models can be used as clinically acceptable alternatives to conventional plaster models.
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
제안 방법
This would eventually allow for analysis of the inter-arch relationship for orthodontic diagnosis and treatment using only digital models scanned from the oral cavity. Additionally, inclusion of an increased number of examiners to test the inter-observer accuracy will help in validating the results of the study.
Figure 1. Measurements performed in this study. DZ_11-41, Distance between the gingival zenith of #11 and #41; DZ_13- 43, Distance between the gingival zenith of #13 and #43; DZ_16-46, Distance between the gingival zenith of #16 and #46; DZ_21-31, Distance between the gingival zenith of #21 and #31; DZ_23-33, Distance between the gingival zenith of #23 and #33; DZ_26-36, Distance between the gingival zenith of #26 and #36; DZ_13-33, Distance between the gingival zenith of #13 and #33; DZ_23-43, Distance between the gingival zenith of #23 and #43; DZ_16-43, Distance between the gingival zenith of #16 and #43; DZ_26-33, Distance between the gingival zenith of #26 and #33; DZ_36-23, Distance between the gingival zenith of #36 and #23; DZ_46-13, Distance between the gingival zenith of #46 and #13.
데이터처리
Repeated measures ANOVA was performed with Bonferroni correction for post hoc analysis of the main effect. For the Friedman test, post hoc analysis involved the Bonferroni-adjusted Wilcoxon rank sum test for multiple comparisons. For multiple comparisons in post hoc analysis, a significance level of 0.
Repeated measures ANOVA (parametric) and the Friedman test (non- parametric) were applied for the 13 normally distributed variables and two variables with non-nor- mal distribution, respectively. Repeated measures ANOVA was performed with Bonferroni correction for post hoc analysis of the main effect. For the Friedman test, post hoc analysis involved the Bonferroni-adjusted Wilcoxon rank sum test for multiple comparisons.
성능/효과
1. Among the 15 measurements, six variables showed statistically significant differences, the largest mean difference was 0.18 mm. This difference is at a clinically acceptable level.
Among the measurements used in our study, only Overjet, Overbite, DZ_11-41, DZ_16-46, DZ_13- 33, and DZ_23-43 showed statistically significant differences, with the largest difference observed in DZ_23-43 measured on Plaster and that measured on Trios (0.18 mm). The differences in the other variables were small: 0.
후속연구
And there is a problem that the occlusal relationship which cannot be physically in plaster model can appear without limitation in the digital bite. In subsequent studies, therefore, it is necessary to investigate whether the occlusal contact points in the oral cavity match the occlusion contact points in the digital model obtained by intraoral scanning. Recently, there was a research to evaluate the tooth movement using a serial intraoral scanning from the patients undergoing orthodontic treatment.
참고문헌 (26)
Horton HM, Miller JR, Gaillard PR, Larson BE. Technique comparison for efficient orthodontic tooth measurements using digital models. Angle Orthod 2010;80:254-61.
Pacheco-Pereira C, De Luca Canto G, Major PW, Flores-Mir C. Variation of orthodontic treatment decision-making based on dental model type: A systematic review. Angle Orthod 2015;85:501-9.
Reuschl RP, Heuer W, Stiesch M, Wenzel D, Dittmer MP. Reliability and validity of measurements on digital study models and plaster models. Eur J Orthod 2016;38:22-6.
Sweeney S, Smith DK, Messersmith M. Comparison of 5 types of interocclusal recording materials on the accuracy of articulation of digital models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2015;148:245-52.
Kihara T, Yoshimi Y, Taji T, Murayama T, Tanimoto K, Nikawa H. Accuracy of a three-dimensional dentition model digitized from an interocclusal record using a non-contact surface scanner. Eur J Orthod 2016;38:435-9.
Fleming PS, Marinho V, Johal A. Orthodontic measurements on digital study models compared with plaster models: a systematic review. Orthod Craniofac Res 2011;14:1-16.
Burzynski JA, Firestone AR, Beck FM, Fields HW Jr, Deguchi T. Comparison of digital intraoral scanners and alginate impressions: Time and patient satisfaction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2018;153:534-41.
Grewal B, Lee RT, Zou L, Johal A. Royal London space analysis: plaster versus digital model assessment. Eur J Orthod 2017;39:320-5.
Goracci C, Franchi L, Vichi A, Ferrari M. Accuracy, reliability, and efficiency of intraoral scanners for full-arch impressions: a systematic review of the clinical evidence. Eur J Orthod 2016;38:422-8.
Anh JW, Park JM, Chun YS, Kim M, Kim M. A comparison of the precision of three-dimensional images acquired by 2 digital intraoral scanners: effects of tooth irregularity and scanning direction. Korean J Orthod 2016;46:3-12.
Darroudi AM, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, Ongkosuwito EM, Suttorp CM, Bronkhorst EM, Breuning KH. Accuracy of a computed tomography scanning procedure to manufacture digital models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2017;151:995-1003.
Kiviahde H, Bukovac L, Jussila P, Pesonen P, Sipila K, Raustia A, Pirttiniemi P. Inter-arch digital model vs. manual cast measurements: Accuracy and reliability. Cranio. 2018;36:222-7.
Wan Hassan WN, Othman SA, Chan CS, Ahmad R, Ali SN, Abd Rohim A. Assessing agreement in measurements of orthodontic study models: Digital caliper on plaster models vs 3-dimensional software on models scanned by structured-light scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016;150:886-95.
Mack S, Bonilla T, English JD, Cozad B, Akyalcin S. Accuracy of 3-dimensional curvilinear measurements on digital models with intraoral scanners. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2017;152:420-5.
Yoon JH, Yu HS, Choi Y, Choi TH, Choi SH, Cha JY. Model Analysis of Digital Models in Moderate to Severe Crowding: In Vivo Validation and Clinical Application. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:8414605.
Koretsi V, Tingelhoff L, Proff P, Kirschneck C. Intra-observer reliability and agreement of manual and digital orthodontic model analysis. Eur J Orthod 2018;40:52-7.
Reuschl RP, Heuer W, Stiesch M, Wenzel D, Dittmer MP. Reliability and validity of measurements on digital study models and plaster models. Eur J Orthod 2016;38:22-6.
Rossini G, Parrini S, Castroflorio T, Deregibus A, Debernardi CL. Diagnostic accuracy and measurement sensitivity of digital models for orthodontic purposes: A systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016;149:161-70.
Porter JL, Carrico CK, Lindauer SJ, Tufekci E. Comparison of intraoral and extraoral scanners on the accuracy of digital model articulation. J Orthod 2018;45:275-82.
Dalsun Yun, Dong-Soon Choi, Insan Jang, Bong-Kuen Cha. Clinical application of an intraoral scanner for serial evaluation of orthodontic tooth movement: A preliminary study. Korean J Orthod. 2018;48(4):262-7.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.