Suppr超能文献

用于评估数字模型准确性和可靠性的比较方法之间存在差异吗?

Are there differences between comparison methods used to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of digital models?

作者信息

Camardella Leonardo Tavares, Breuning Hero, Vilella Oswaldo de Vasconcellos

机构信息

Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Universidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, RJ, Brazil.

Department of Orthodontics, Nijmegen Medical Centre, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Dental Press J Orthod. 2017 Feb;22(1):65-74. doi: 10.1590/2177-6709.22.1.065-074.oar.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The accuracy and reliability of plaster models and digital models acquired with two different surface laser scanners were tested by means of three methods: measurement with calipers, digital measurement with proper software and superimposition of the digital models.

METHODS

Thirty plaster models with permanent dentition that met the inclusion criteria were selected and scanned with two laser scanners (R700 and Xcad). Three examiners measured distances on plaster models with a digital caliper and on digital models using Ortho Analyzer software. The digital models were also compared by means of superimposition of the models using the Geomagic Qualify software. The intra and inter-examiner reliability of the measurements were evaluated using the ICC. Paired t test was used to test the accuracy of the measurements on digital and plaster models.

RESULTS

The measurements on plaster and digital models acquired by two different scanners showed high values for the ICC. Although statistically significant differences between the measurements on plaster and digital models have been found, these discrepancies were not considered clinically relevant. The superimposition method with Geomagic Qualify software showed that the two digital models were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

Digital models created from scanned plaster models using the R700 or Xcad scanners were clinically accurate according to the two methods of comparison used.

摘要

目的

通过三种方法测试用两种不同的表面激光扫描仪获取的石膏模型和数字模型的准确性和可靠性:用卡尺测量、使用适当软件进行数字测量以及数字模型的叠加。

方法

选择30个符合纳入标准的恒牙列石膏模型,并用两种激光扫描仪(R700和Xcad)进行扫描。三名检查者用数字卡尺在石膏模型上测量距离,并使用Ortho Analyzer软件在数字模型上测量。还使用Geomagic Qualify软件通过模型叠加的方式比较数字模型。使用组内相关系数(ICC)评估测量的检查者内和检查者间可靠性。配对t检验用于测试数字模型和石膏模型测量的准确性。

结果

两种不同扫描仪获取的石膏模型和数字模型的测量结果显示ICC值较高。虽然在石膏模型和数字模型的测量之间发现了统计学上的显著差异,但这些差异在临床上不被认为具有相关性。使用Geomagic Qualify软件的叠加方法显示,两个数字模型没有显著差异。

结论

根据所使用的两种比较方法,使用R700或Xcad扫描仪从扫描的石膏模型创建的数字模型在临床上是准确的。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/feb5/5398844/0cee432a7a12/2176-9451-dpjo-22-01-00065-gf1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验