Puleio Francesco, Lo Giudice Giorgio, Alibrandi Angela, Campione Ilenia, Di Spirito Federica, Lo Giudice Roberto
Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and Morphofunctional Imaging, Messina University, 98122 Messina, Italy.
Unit of Statistical and Mathematical Sciences, Department of Economics, Messina University, 98122 Messina, Italy.
Dent J (Basel). 2025 Aug 29;13(9):395. doi: 10.3390/dj13090395.
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. 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 -tests, Cronbach's Alpha, and Bland-Altman analysis assessed differences, reliability, and agreement. The results showed a statistically significant difference between the two methods of measurements in group A ( = 0.016) and high statistical significance was obtained in group B ( = 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. 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.
准确的面部比例分析对于牙科治疗计划至关重要。本研究旨在通过将Planmeca ProFace 3D扫描仪的数字测量结果与游标卡尺测量结果进行比较，来评估其准确性。一项比较性横断面研究纳入了7名患者。使用数字测量和游标卡尺测量了14个标准化的面部标志点。距离被分为小距离（≤6.5 cm，A组）或大距离（>6.5 cm，B组）。配对t检验、克朗巴哈系数和布兰德-奥特曼分析评估了差异、可靠性和一致性。结果显示，A组两种测量方法之间存在统计学显著差异（P = 0.016），B组具有高度统计学显著性（P = 0.001）。克朗巴哈系数显示A组具有高可靠性（α = 0.982），而B组较低（α = 0.270）。A组游标卡尺测量值与软件测量值之间的平均差异为0.24 ± 0.9标准差（最小值0.16，最大值2.92），B组为0.71 ± 2.8标准差（最小值0.02，最大值4.17）。布兰德-奥特曼分析显示存在一致的正比例偏差，随着测量值增大差异增加。通过数字扫描技术进行的面部标志点测量显示，对于小于或等于6.5 cm的测量，测量值与模拟技术重叠，而对于距离大于6.5 cm的点存在显著偏差。需要采用混合方法或补偿策略来确保临床精度。
