Clinical evaluation of the accuracy of two face scanners with different scanning technologies

IF 4.8 2区医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE

Journal of dentistry Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105553

Murali Srinivasan , Claudio Rodrigues Leles , Florentin Berisha , Innocenzo Bronzino , Yasmin Milhomens , Sung-Jin Kim , Koungjin Park , Jae-Hyun Lee

{"title":"Clinical evaluation of the accuracy of two face scanners with different scanning technologies","authors":"Murali Srinivasan , Claudio Rodrigues Leles , Florentin Berisha , Innocenzo Bronzino , Yasmin Milhomens , Sung-Jin Kim , Koungjin Park , Jae-Hyun Lee","doi":"10.1016/j.jdent.2024.105553","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This study compared the clinical accuracy of two different stationary face scanners, employing progressive capture and multi-view simultaneous capture scanning technologies.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Forty dentate volunteers participated in the study. Soft tissue landmarks were marked with a pen on the participants' faces to measure the distances between them. Clinical measurements were manually obtained using a digital vernier caliper by two independent examiners. The participants were then scanned using one of two stationary face scanners: Obiscanner (Fifthingenium), which employs progressive capture technology requiring the subject's head to rotate during image acquisition, or RAYFace (RAY), which utilizes multiple cameras to simultaneously capture a complete 3D image. The scans were imported into mesh-processing software, and digital measurements were taken by the same examiners. Data analysis included pairwise comparison tests and the calculation of the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC; α = 0.05).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Digital measurements were significantly longer than clinical measurements across all measured distances (<em>p</em> < 0.001). Comparisons between the scanners revealed that vertical measurements using RAYface exhibited greater percentage differences compared to those using Obiscanner (<em>p</em> < 0.05), while horizontal measurements were more variable with Obiscanner than those obtained using RAYface (<em>p</em> < 0.05). Intra-examiner differences were significant for both methods (<em>p</em> < 0.001), although inter-examiner differences were only significant for clinical measurements (<em>p</em> < 0.001), not for digital measurements (<em>p</em> > 0.05). Inter-examiner reliability for digital measurements was high (ICC≥0.99).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Significant differences were observed in the accuracy of the two stationary face scanners using progressive capture and multi-view simultaneous capture scanning technologies, with each device demonstrating specific strengths and limitations.</div></div><div><h3>Clinical Significance</h3><div>Although face scanners offer relatively high accuracy and consistency, particularly across different acquisition technologies, careful consideration of their performance characteristics is essential for optimizing accuracy in facial measurements.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15585,"journal":{"name":"Journal of dentistry","volume":"153 ","pages":"Article 105553"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030057122400722X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

This study compared the clinical accuracy of two different stationary face scanners, employing progressive capture and multi-view simultaneous capture scanning technologies.

Methods

Forty dentate volunteers participated in the study. Soft tissue landmarks were marked with a pen on the participants' faces to measure the distances between them. Clinical measurements were manually obtained using a digital vernier caliper by two independent examiners. The participants were then scanned using one of two stationary face scanners: Obiscanner (Fifthingenium), which employs progressive capture technology requiring the subject's head to rotate during image acquisition, or RAYFace (RAY), which utilizes multiple cameras to simultaneously capture a complete 3D image. The scans were imported into mesh-processing software, and digital measurements were taken by the same examiners. Data analysis included pairwise comparison tests and the calculation of the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC; α = 0.05).

Results

Digital measurements were significantly longer than clinical measurements across all measured distances (p < 0.001). Comparisons between the scanners revealed that vertical measurements using RAYface exhibited greater percentage differences compared to those using Obiscanner (p < 0.05), while horizontal measurements were more variable with Obiscanner than those obtained using RAYface (p < 0.05). Intra-examiner differences were significant for both methods (p < 0.001), although inter-examiner differences were only significant for clinical measurements (p < 0.001), not for digital measurements (p > 0.05). Inter-examiner reliability for digital measurements was high (ICC≥0.99).

Conclusions

Significant differences were observed in the accuracy of the two stationary face scanners using progressive capture and multi-view simultaneous capture scanning technologies, with each device demonstrating specific strengths and limitations.

Clinical Significance

Although face scanners offer relatively high accuracy and consistency, particularly across different acquisition technologies, careful consideration of their performance characteristics is essential for optimizing accuracy in facial measurements.

查看原文本刊更多论文

两种不同扫描技术面部扫描器准确度的临床评价。

目的：本研究比较了两种不同的固定式人脸扫描仪的临床准确性，采用渐进式捕获和多视角同步捕获扫描技术。方法：40名有牙齿的志愿者参与了这项研究。用笔在参与者的脸上标记软组织标志，以测量他们之间的距离。临床测量由两名独立检查员使用数字游标卡尺手动获得。然后使用两种固定面部扫描仪中的一种扫描参与者的面部：Obiscanner (Obi)，采用渐进式捕获技术，要求受试者的头部在图像采集过程中旋转，或RAYFace (RAY)，利用多个摄像头同时捕获完整的3D图像。扫描结果被输入到网格处理软件中，由相同的检查人员进行数字测量。数据分析包括两两比较检验和计算类内相关系数(ICC；α= 0.05)。结果：在所有测量距离上，数字测量明显长于临床测量（p0.05）。数字测量的检查者间信度很高（ICC≥0.99）。结论：采用渐进式捕获和多视图同步捕获扫描技术的两种固定式面部扫描仪在准确性上存在显著差异，每种设备都显示出特定的优势和局限性。临床意义：尽管面部扫描仪提供了相对较高的准确性和一致性，特别是在不同的采集技术中，仔细考虑其性能特征对于优化面部测量的准确性至关重要。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of dentistry 医学-牙科与口腔外科

CiteScore

7.30

自引率

11.40%

发文量

349

审稿时长

35 days

期刊介绍： The Journal of Dentistry has an open access mirror journal The Journal of Dentistry: X, sharing the same aims and scope, editorial team, submission system and rigorous peer review. The Journal of Dentistry is the leading international dental journal within the field of Restorative Dentistry. Placing an emphasis on publishing novel and high-quality research papers, the Journal aims to influence the practice of dentistry at clinician, research, industry and policy-maker level on an international basis. Topics covered include the management of dental disease, periodontology, endodontology, operative dentistry, fixed and removable prosthodontics, dental biomaterials science, long-term clinical trials including epidemiology and oral health, technology transfer of new scientific instrumentation or procedures, as well as clinically relevant oral biology and translational research. The Journal of Dentistry will publish original scientific research papers including short communications. It is also interested in publishing review articles and leaders in themed areas which will be linked to new scientific research. Conference proceedings are also welcome and expressions of interest should be communicated to the Editor.