通过口内扫描获得的 3D 打印模型和数字模型与口内测量得出的牙齿大小和牙弓尺寸的比较。

Q2 Dentistry
Suthinee Kanokpoonsin, Supakit Peanchitlertkajorn, Nuntinee-Nanthavanich Saengfai, Supatchai Boonpratham
{"title":"通过口内扫描获得的 3D 打印模型和数字模型与口内测量得出的牙齿大小和牙弓尺寸的比较。","authors":"Suthinee Kanokpoonsin, Supakit Peanchitlertkajorn, Nuntinee-Nanthavanich Saengfai, Supatchai Boonpratham","doi":"10.4317/jced.61891","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To compare measurements of tooth size and arch dimensions among those taken directly intraorally with those made on digital and 3D printed models produced by intraoral scanning.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Sixty-six participants were recruited. Intraoral tooth size and arch measurements were taken intraorally with a digital caliper. Digital impressions were taken with an iTero® intraoral scanner. The three-dimensional digital models were measured using a 3D diagnostics tool (OrthoCAD software). The same digital models were used to fabricate physical models using a resin 3D printer (Elegoo Saturn). The measurements were repeated on 3D printed models by using the digital caliper. The recorded parameters included mesiodistal tooth widths, transverse, and antero-posterior dimensions. All measurements were repeated to assess intra- and inter- examiner reliability. The validity of each measurement method was assessed by repeated measures ANOVA with post-hoc pairwise comparisons (<i>p</i><0.5).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean differences among three methods for all parameters were statistically significant (<i>p</i><.05) but were considered to be clinically insignificant, except for the upper intercanine width. Direct intraoral measurements tend to be smaller than the digital and 3D printed models. The ICCs values indicated excellent intra- and inter-examiner reliability which demonstrates high reproducibility for all measurements on all model types.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Direct intraoral measurements tend to be smaller than the digital and 3D printed models. However, the accuracy of measurements made directly intraorally, and on digital and 3D models from intraoral scans is clinically acceptable, except for the upper intercanine width. <b>Key words:</b>Tooth measurements, Accuracy, Dental models, 3D printing, Digital model.</p>","PeriodicalId":15376,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry","volume":"16 8","pages":"e1012-e1020"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11392450/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of Tooth Size and Arch Dimensions Among Measurements Taken Intraorally with 3D-Printed and Digital Models Obtained from Intraoral Scans.\",\"authors\":\"Suthinee Kanokpoonsin, Supakit Peanchitlertkajorn, Nuntinee-Nanthavanich Saengfai, Supatchai Boonpratham\",\"doi\":\"10.4317/jced.61891\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To compare measurements of tooth size and arch dimensions among those taken directly intraorally with those made on digital and 3D printed models produced by intraoral scanning.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Sixty-six participants were recruited. Intraoral tooth size and arch measurements were taken intraorally with a digital caliper. Digital impressions were taken with an iTero® intraoral scanner. The three-dimensional digital models were measured using a 3D diagnostics tool (OrthoCAD software). The same digital models were used to fabricate physical models using a resin 3D printer (Elegoo Saturn). The measurements were repeated on 3D printed models by using the digital caliper. The recorded parameters included mesiodistal tooth widths, transverse, and antero-posterior dimensions. All measurements were repeated to assess intra- and inter- examiner reliability. The validity of each measurement method was assessed by repeated measures ANOVA with post-hoc pairwise comparisons (<i>p</i><0.5).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean differences among three methods for all parameters were statistically significant (<i>p</i><.05) but were considered to be clinically insignificant, except for the upper intercanine width. Direct intraoral measurements tend to be smaller than the digital and 3D printed models. The ICCs values indicated excellent intra- and inter-examiner reliability which demonstrates high reproducibility for all measurements on all model types.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Direct intraoral measurements tend to be smaller than the digital and 3D printed models. However, the accuracy of measurements made directly intraorally, and on digital and 3D models from intraoral scans is clinically acceptable, except for the upper intercanine width. <b>Key words:</b>Tooth measurements, Accuracy, Dental models, 3D printing, Digital model.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15376,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry\",\"volume\":\"16 8\",\"pages\":\"e1012-e1020\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11392450/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.61891\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4317/jced.61891","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:材料与方法:比较口内直接测量与通过口内扫描制作的数字和三维打印模型测量的牙齿大小和牙弓尺寸:招募了 66 名参与者。使用数字卡尺测量口内牙齿大小和牙弓尺寸。使用 iTero® 口内扫描仪采集数字印模。使用三维诊断工具(OrthoCAD 软件)测量三维数字模型。使用树脂三维打印机(Elegoo Saturn)将相同的数字模型制作成实体模型。使用数字卡尺对 3D 打印模型进行重复测量。记录的参数包括牙间宽度、横向和前后尺寸。所有测量均重复进行,以评估检查者内部和检查者之间的可靠性。每种测量方法的有效性通过重复测量方差分析和事后配对比较进行评估(p结果:所有参数的三种方法的平均值差异均有统计学意义(p结论:口内直接测量结果往往比数字模型和三维打印模型小。然而,口内直接测量以及根据口内扫描结果制作的数字和三维模型的准确性在临床上是可以接受的,但上齿间宽度除外。关键词:牙齿测量 准确性 牙齿模型 三维打印 数字化模型
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Comparison of Tooth Size and Arch Dimensions Among Measurements Taken Intraorally with 3D-Printed and Digital Models Obtained from Intraoral Scans.

Background: To compare measurements of tooth size and arch dimensions among those taken directly intraorally with those made on digital and 3D printed models produced by intraoral scanning.

Material and methods: Sixty-six participants were recruited. Intraoral tooth size and arch measurements were taken intraorally with a digital caliper. Digital impressions were taken with an iTero® intraoral scanner. The three-dimensional digital models were measured using a 3D diagnostics tool (OrthoCAD software). The same digital models were used to fabricate physical models using a resin 3D printer (Elegoo Saturn). The measurements were repeated on 3D printed models by using the digital caliper. The recorded parameters included mesiodistal tooth widths, transverse, and antero-posterior dimensions. All measurements were repeated to assess intra- and inter- examiner reliability. The validity of each measurement method was assessed by repeated measures ANOVA with post-hoc pairwise comparisons (p<0.5).

Results: The mean differences among three methods for all parameters were statistically significant (p<.05) but were considered to be clinically insignificant, except for the upper intercanine width. Direct intraoral measurements tend to be smaller than the digital and 3D printed models. The ICCs values indicated excellent intra- and inter-examiner reliability which demonstrates high reproducibility for all measurements on all model types.

Conclusions: Direct intraoral measurements tend to be smaller than the digital and 3D printed models. However, the accuracy of measurements made directly intraorally, and on digital and 3D models from intraoral scans is clinically acceptable, except for the upper intercanine width. Key words:Tooth measurements, Accuracy, Dental models, 3D printing, Digital model.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
118
期刊介绍: Indexed in PUBMED, PubMed Central® (PMC) since 2012 and SCOPUSJournal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry is an Open Access (free access on-line) - http://www.medicinaoral.com/odo/indice.htm. The aim of the Journal of Clinical and Experimental Dentistry is: - Periodontology - Community and Preventive Dentistry - Esthetic Dentistry - Biomaterials and Bioengineering in Dentistry - Operative Dentistry and Endodontics - Prosthetic Dentistry - Orthodontics - Oral Medicine and Pathology - Odontostomatology for the disabled or special patients - Oral Surgery
×
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