The Comparison of Diagnostic Measurements Using Two Different Three-Dimensional Digital Orthodontic Model Software Systems

R. Nalçacı, B. Aydın, S. Çokakoğlu, A. Biçakçi, H. Orhan
{"title":"The Comparison of Diagnostic Measurements Using Two Different Three-Dimensional Digital Orthodontic Model Software Systems","authors":"R. Nalçacı, B. Aydın, S. Çokakoğlu, A. Biçakçi, H. Orhan","doi":"10.12974/2311-8695.2017.05.01.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the reliability and accuracy of diagnostic measurements performed using two different three-dimensional (3D) digital orthodontic model software systems.\nMaterials and Methods: The dental casts of 20 patients with permanent dentition were selected and scanned with an orthodontic 3D scanner (3Shape R700, Copenhagen, Denmark). Two different digital model software programs, Orthomodel (v.1.01, Orthomodel Inc., Istanbul, Turkey) and O3DM (v.2.0, O3DM Thunoegade, Aarhus C, Denmark) were used for diagnostic measurements including tooth width, Bolton discrepancies, intermolar and intercanine distances. A total of 34 measurements were calculated on each digital model. All measurements were repeated by the same observer over 10 randomly selected dental casts at least two weeks later for intraobserver reliability. Results were analyzed statistically. The paired samples t-test was used to compare the differences between the measurements obtained with both softwares. The intraobserver reliability was determined using Cronbach’s alpha test.\nResults: Cronbach’s alpha value indicated a very high level of reliability for all measurements. Orthomodel and O3DM software programs showed significant differences in the mesiodistal widths of some teeth and the sum of maxillary 6 teeth widths (p<0.05), but not in the Bolton ratios and transverse arch width measurements.\nConclusions: Both digital model softwares demonstrated clinically acceptable measurements despite of the differences in some measurements essential for diagnosis and treatment planning. ","PeriodicalId":76664,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of the American College of Dentists","volume":"63 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of the American College of Dentists","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12974/2311-8695.2017.05.01.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the reliability and accuracy of diagnostic measurements performed using two different three-dimensional (3D) digital orthodontic model software systems. Materials and Methods: The dental casts of 20 patients with permanent dentition were selected and scanned with an orthodontic 3D scanner (3Shape R700, Copenhagen, Denmark). Two different digital model software programs, Orthomodel (v.1.01, Orthomodel Inc., Istanbul, Turkey) and O3DM (v.2.0, O3DM Thunoegade, Aarhus C, Denmark) were used for diagnostic measurements including tooth width, Bolton discrepancies, intermolar and intercanine distances. A total of 34 measurements were calculated on each digital model. All measurements were repeated by the same observer over 10 randomly selected dental casts at least two weeks later for intraobserver reliability. Results were analyzed statistically. The paired samples t-test was used to compare the differences between the measurements obtained with both softwares. The intraobserver reliability was determined using Cronbach’s alpha test. Results: Cronbach’s alpha value indicated a very high level of reliability for all measurements. Orthomodel and O3DM software programs showed significant differences in the mesiodistal widths of some teeth and the sum of maxillary 6 teeth widths (p<0.05), but not in the Bolton ratios and transverse arch width measurements. Conclusions: Both digital model softwares demonstrated clinically acceptable measurements despite of the differences in some measurements essential for diagnosis and treatment planning. 
两种不同的三维数字正畸模型软件系统诊断测量的比较
目的:本研究的目的是评估和比较使用两种不同的三维(3D)数字正畸模型软件系统进行诊断测量的可靠性和准确性。材料与方法:选择20例恒牙患者的牙模,采用正畸3D扫描仪(3Shape R700, Copenhagen, Denmark)进行扫描。两种不同的数字模型软件程序,Orthomodel (v.1.01, Orthomodel Inc.,伊斯坦布尔,土耳其)和O3DM (v.2.0, O3DM Thunoegade,奥胡斯C,丹麦)用于诊断测量,包括牙齿宽度,博尔顿差异,磨牙间和犬齿间距离。每个数字模型一共计算了34个测量值。所有的测量都是由同一观察者在至少两周后随机选择的10个牙模中重复进行的,以保证观察者内部的可靠性。结果进行统计学分析。配对样本t检验用于比较两个软件获得的测量值之间的差异。采用Cronbach 's alpha检验确定观察者内信度。结果:Cronbach 's alpha值表明所有测量值的可靠性都很高。orthommodel和O3DM软件程序在部分牙齿的中远端宽度和上颌6个牙齿宽度的总和上显示有显著性差异(p<0.05),但在博尔顿比和横弓宽度测量上无显著性差异。结论:尽管在诊断和治疗计划中必要的一些测量值存在差异,但两种数字模型软件均显示临床可接受的测量值。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信