Kanokpoonsin Suthinee, Peanchitlertkajorn Supakit, Saengfai Nuntinee-Nanthavanich, Boonpratham Supatchai
Dr., D.D.S. Residency training in orthodontic department, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Thailand.
Associate Professor, D.D.S., M.D.S. Diplomate, American board of Orthodontics, Diplomate, American Board of Dental Sleep Medicine, Diplomate, Thai Board of Orthodontics, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Thailand.
J Clin Exp Dent. 2024 Aug 1;16(8):e1012-e1020. doi: 10.4317/jced.61891. eCollection 2024 Aug.
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.
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 (<0.5).
The mean differences among three methods for all parameters were statistically significant (<.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.
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. Tooth measurements, Accuracy, Dental models, 3D printing, Digital model.
比较直接在口腔内进行的牙齿尺寸和牙弓尺寸测量结果与通过口腔扫描生成的数字模型和3D打印模型上的测量结果。
招募了66名参与者。使用数字卡尺在口腔内测量牙齿尺寸和牙弓。使用iTero®口腔扫描仪获取数字印模。使用3D诊断工具(OrthoCAD软件)测量三维数字模型。使用树脂3D打印机(Elegoo Saturn)将相同的数字模型制作成物理模型。使用数字卡尺在3D打印模型上重复测量。记录的参数包括近远中牙齿宽度、横向和前后尺寸。所有测量均重复进行以评估检查者内和检查者间的可靠性。通过重复测量方差分析和事后成对比较(<0.5)评估每种测量方法的有效性。
除了上颌尖牙间宽度外,所有参数的三种测量方法之间的平均差异具有统计学意义(<.05),但被认为在临床上无显著意义。直接口腔内测量往往小于数字模型和3D打印模型。组内相关系数(ICCs)值表明检查者内和检查者间具有出色的可靠性,这表明所有模型类型上的所有测量都具有高再现性。
直接口腔内测量往往小于数字模型和3D打印模型。然而,除了上颌尖牙间宽度外,直接在口腔内以及对口腔扫描生成的数字模型和3D模型进行测量的准确性在临床上是可接受的。牙齿测量、准确性、牙科模型、3D打印、数字模型。