面部测量的精度:数字三维扫描仪和模拟仪器之间的比较分析。

IF 3.1 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Francesco Puleio, Giorgio Lo Giudice, Angela Alibrandi, Ilenia Campione, Federica Di Spirito, Roberto Lo Giudice
{"title":"面部测量的精度:数字三维扫描仪和模拟仪器之间的比较分析。","authors":"Francesco Puleio, Giorgio Lo Giudice, Angela Alibrandi, Ilenia Campione, Federica Di Spirito, Roberto Lo Giudice","doi":"10.3390/dj13090395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Accurate facial proportion analysis is essential for therapeutic planning in dentistry. This study aimed to evaluate the Planmeca ProFace 3D scanner's accuracy by comparing its digital measurements to analog caliper measurements. <b>Methods:</b> A comparative cross-sectional study included seven patients. Fourteen standardized facial landmarks were measured digitally and with an analog caliper. Distances were grouped as small (≤6.5 cm, Group A) or large (>6.5 cm, Group B). Paired <i>t</i>-tests, Cronbach's Alpha, and Bland-Altman analysis assessed differences, reliability, and agreement. <b>Results:</b> The results showed a statistically significant difference between the two methods of measurements in group A (<i>p</i> = 0.016) and high statistical significance was obtained in group B (<i>p</i> = 0.001). Cronbach's Alpha showed high reliability for Group A (α = 0.982) but low for Group B (α = 0.270). The mean difference between the caliper and software measurements was 0.24 ± 0.9 SD (min 0.16 max 2.92) in group A and 0.71 ± 2.8 SD (min 0.02 max 4.17). Bland-Altman analysis revealed a consistent positive proportional bias, with differences increasing for larger measurements. <b>Conclusions:</b> Facial point measurements by the means of digital scanning technique show measurements overlapping with analog technique for measurements less than or equal to 6.5 cm, with significant deviation for points with a distance greater than 6.5 cm. A hybrid approach or compensatory strategies are needed to ensure clinical precision.</p>","PeriodicalId":11269,"journal":{"name":"Dentistry Journal","volume":"13 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12468633/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Precision in Facial Measurements: Comparative Analysis Between a Digital 3D Scanner and an Analog Instrument.\",\"authors\":\"Francesco Puleio, Giorgio Lo Giudice, Angela Alibrandi, Ilenia Campione, Federica Di Spirito, Roberto Lo Giudice\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/dj13090395\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Accurate facial proportion analysis is essential for therapeutic planning in dentistry. This study aimed to evaluate the Planmeca ProFace 3D scanner's accuracy by comparing its digital measurements to analog caliper measurements. <b>Methods:</b> A comparative cross-sectional study included seven patients. Fourteen standardized facial landmarks were measured digitally and with an analog caliper. Distances were grouped as small (≤6.5 cm, Group A) or large (>6.5 cm, Group B). Paired <i>t</i>-tests, Cronbach's Alpha, and Bland-Altman analysis assessed differences, reliability, and agreement. <b>Results:</b> The results showed a statistically significant difference between the two methods of measurements in group A (<i>p</i> = 0.016) and high statistical significance was obtained in group B (<i>p</i> = 0.001). Cronbach's Alpha showed high reliability for Group A (α = 0.982) but low for Group B (α = 0.270). The mean difference between the caliper and software measurements was 0.24 ± 0.9 SD (min 0.16 max 2.92) in group A and 0.71 ± 2.8 SD (min 0.02 max 4.17). Bland-Altman analysis revealed a consistent positive proportional bias, with differences increasing for larger measurements. <b>Conclusions:</b> Facial point measurements by the means of digital scanning technique show measurements overlapping with analog technique for measurements less than or equal to 6.5 cm, with significant deviation for points with a distance greater than 6.5 cm. A hybrid approach or compensatory strategies are needed to ensure clinical precision.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11269,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dentistry Journal\",\"volume\":\"13 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12468633/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dentistry Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/dj13090395\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dentistry Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/dj13090395","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:准确的面部比例分析对牙科治疗计划至关重要。本研究旨在通过比较其数字测量和模拟卡尺测量来评估Planmeca ProFace 3D扫描仪的精度。方法:比较横断面研究包括7例患者。14个标准化的面部标志用数字和模拟卡尺测量。距离分为小(≤6.5 cm, A组)和大(≤6.5 cm, B组)。配对t检验、Cronbach’s Alpha和Bland-Altman分析评估了差异、信度和一致性。结果:a组两种测量方法比较差异有统计学意义(p = 0.016), B组比较差异有高度统计学意义(p = 0.001)。A组的Cronbach’s Alpha信度高(α = 0.982), B组的Cronbach’s Alpha信度低(α = 0.270)。A组卡尺测量值与软件测量值的平均差异为0.24±0.9 SD(最小0.16,最大2.92),0.71±2.8 SD(最小0.02,最大4.17)。Bland-Altman分析显示了一致的正比例偏差,随着测量量的增加,差异也在增加。结论:采用数字扫描技术测量的面部点在小于或等于6.5 cm时,测量结果与模拟测量结果重叠,大于6.5 cm时,测量结果有明显偏差。需要混合方法或补偿策略来确保临床准确性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Precision in Facial Measurements: Comparative Analysis Between a Digital 3D Scanner and an Analog Instrument.

Background: Accurate facial proportion analysis is essential for therapeutic planning in dentistry. This study aimed to evaluate the Planmeca ProFace 3D scanner's accuracy by comparing its digital measurements to analog caliper measurements. Methods: A comparative cross-sectional study included seven patients. Fourteen standardized facial landmarks were measured digitally and with an analog caliper. Distances were grouped as small (≤6.5 cm, Group A) or large (>6.5 cm, Group B). Paired t-tests, Cronbach's Alpha, and Bland-Altman analysis assessed differences, reliability, and agreement. Results: The results showed a statistically significant difference between the two methods of measurements in group A (p = 0.016) and high statistical significance was obtained in group B (p = 0.001). Cronbach's Alpha showed high reliability for Group A (α = 0.982) but low for Group B (α = 0.270). The mean difference between the caliper and software measurements was 0.24 ± 0.9 SD (min 0.16 max 2.92) in group A and 0.71 ± 2.8 SD (min 0.02 max 4.17). Bland-Altman analysis revealed a consistent positive proportional bias, with differences increasing for larger measurements. Conclusions: Facial point measurements by the means of digital scanning technique show measurements overlapping with analog technique for measurements less than or equal to 6.5 cm, with significant deviation for points with a distance greater than 6.5 cm. A hybrid approach or compensatory strategies are needed to ensure clinical precision.

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
Dentistry Journal
Dentistry Journal Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
213
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信