Suppr超能文献

评估两种数字化口内扫描仪的准确性:一项三维分析研究。

Evaluation of the accuracy of 2 digital intraoral scanners: A 3D analysis study.

机构信息

Assistant Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Assistant Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dental Medicine, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ.

出版信息

J Prosthet Dent. 2021 Dec;126(6):787-792. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2020.10.004. Epub 2020 Nov 7.

Abstract

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Evidence for the accuracy of a recently introduced intraoral scanner is lacking.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate and compare the trueness (validity) and precision (reliability) of 2 intraoral scanners by scanning a quadrant and a sextant.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A maxillary typodont with plastic teeth made from a shade A3 polymethyl methacrylate was scanned (n=10) with each intraoral scanner (Planmeca Emerald and 3Shape TRIOS 3) to obtain sextant and quadrant scans. Control scans were made with an industrial optical scanner. The scans were analyzed with a 3D reverse engineering software program and an independent samples t test and general linear model 2-way analysis of variance (α=.05).

RESULTS

The 3Shape TRIOS 3 scanner showed no significant difference between the sextant and quadrant scans in trueness (P=.118) or in precision (P<.285). The Emerald scanner had statistically significant higher trueness for the sextant scan (P=.007). The 3Shape TRIOS 3 scanner had better performance in trueness and precision when compared with the Emerald scanner.

CONCLUSIONS

The 3Shape TRIOS 3 scanner was found to be more accurate than the Emerald scanner in terms of trueness and precision, regardless of the scanning field. The Emerald scanner's trueness decreased as the scanning field increased from a sextant to a quadrant.

摘要

问题陈述

缺乏对最近引入的口腔内扫描仪准确性的证据。

目的

本体外研究的目的是通过扫描象限和六分仪来评估和比较两种口腔内扫描仪的准确性(有效性)和精密度(可靠性)。

材料和方法

使用来自 A3 聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯的塑料牙的上颌仿头模,使用每个口腔内扫描仪(Planmeca Emerald 和 3Shape TRIOS 3)进行六分仪和象限扫描(n=10)。使用工业光学扫描仪进行对照扫描。使用 3D 逆向工程软件程序和独立样本 t 检验和一般线性模型 2 方式方差分析(α=.05)分析扫描。

结果

3Shape TRIOS 3 扫描仪在准确性(P=.118)或精密度(P<.285)方面,六分仪和象限扫描之间没有显著差异。 Emerald 扫描仪的六分仪扫描具有统计学上更高的准确性(P=.007)。与 Emerald 扫描仪相比,3Shape TRIOS 3 扫描仪在准确性和精密度方面表现更好。

结论

无论扫描区域如何,3Shape TRIOS 3 扫描仪在准确性和精密度方面都被发现比 Emerald 扫描仪更准确。 Emerald 扫描仪的准确性随着扫描区域从六分仪增加到象限而降低。

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