Jeong 2016
Jeong 2016
Jeong 2016
Table 1. Trueness of 2 different types of intraoral scan and laboratory Table 2. Precision of 2 different types of intraoral scan and laboratory
scan of complete dental arch scan of complete dental arch
Intraoral Video Intraoral Still Laboratory Intraoral Video Intraoral Still Laboratory
Scanner Image Scanner Scanner Scanner Image Scanner Scanner
Variable (mean ±SD) (mean ±SD) (mean ±SD) P Variable (mean ±SD) (Mean ±SD) (mean ±SD) P
RMS (mm) 197 ±4a 378 ±11b 170 ±12a <.05 RMS (mm) 58 ±13a 116 ±28b 78 ±15c <.05
SD (mm) 195 ±4a 375 ±14b 165 ±12a <.05 SD (mm) 57 ±13a 115 ±28b 78 ±14c <.05
+AVG (mm) 114 ±6a 211 ±16b 81 ±15a <.05 +AVG (mm) 37 ±10a 65 ±19b 43 ±10a <.05
−AVG (mm) 83 ±5a 151 ±9b 82 ±8a <.05 −AVG (mm) 42 ±11a 63 ±15b 51 ±13c <.05
Tolerance (%) 52 ±4a 53 ±8a 42 ±14a <.05 Tolerance (%) 73 ±13a 64 ±14a 70 ±13a <.05
Means in row with different superscript letters indicate significant difference (P<.05) by *Means in row with different superscript letters indicate significant difference (P<.05) by
ANOVA and Tukey HSD post hoc test. ANOVA and Tukey HSD post hoc test.
Figure 1. Three-dimensional deviations between scan data and reference data. A, Trueness. B, Within each test group, precision.
value. The Levene test was used to assess the equality of RESULTS
variance, and, according to the result, the differences be-
A comparison of the trueness and precision of each
tween the test groups were analyzed using 1-way ANOVA
scanner is shown in Tables 1, 2. With regard to trueness,
and post hoc Tukey HSD tests (a=.05).
the intraoral video scanner and blue-light scanner groups
values. The tolerance patterns of deviation for all 3 2. Christensen GJ. Will digital impressions eliminate the current problems with
conventional impressions? J Am Dent Assoc 2008;139:761-3.
groups showed high deviation at the labial surface of the 3. Christensen GJ. Impressions are changing: deciding on conventional, digital
anterior teeth and the maxillary second molars, whereas or digital plus in office milling. J Am Dent Assoc 2009;140:1301-4.
4. Patzelt SB, Emmanouilidi A, Stampf S, Strub JR, Att W. Accuracy of full-arch
the blue-light scanner showed a small amount of devi- scans using intraoral scanners. Clin Oral Investig 2014;18:1687-94.
ation in many parts of the model, without a definitive 5. Ender A, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a
new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent 2013;109:
pattern. This seemed to result from the overall random 121-8.
error of the blue-light scanner, which would have 6. Nedelcu RG, Persson AS. Scanning accuracy and precision in 4 intraoral
scanners: an in vitro comparison based on 3-dimensional analysis. J Prosthet
occurred in the workflow from a conventional impression Dent 2014;112:1461-71.
to a stone cast to a laboratory scan. Therefore, analyses 7. Ender A, Mehl A. In vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and
digital methods of obtaining full-arch dental impressions. Quintessence Int
of the trueness and precision in this study showed that 2014;46:9-17.
the Omnicam was not significantly more accurate than 8. Güth JF, Keul C, Stimmelmayr M, Beuer F, Edelhoff D. Accuracy of digital
models obtained by direct and indirect data capturing. Clin Oral Investig
the laboratory scan; hence, our data do not support the 2013;17:1201-8.
concept that intraoral video scanners can replace labo- 9. Flügge TV, Schlager S, Nelson K, Nahles S, Metzger MC. Precision of
intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitization with
ratory scanning. the iTero and a model scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144:
Although the quantities of the point sets of the 471-8.
10. Rudolph H, Luthardt RG, Walter MH. Computer-aided analysis of the in-
intraoral scanners were significantly less than those of fluence of digitizing and surfacing on the accuracy in dental CAD/CAM
the blue-light scanner (Fig. 2), no significant difference in technology. Comput Biol Med 2007;37:579-87.
11. Trifkovic B, Budak I, Todorovic A, Vukelic D, Lazic V, Puskar T. Comparative
trueness was found between the intraoral video scanner analysis on measuring performances of dental intraoral and extraoral optical
and blue-light scanner data. This may have been because 3D digitization systems. Measurement 2014;47:45-53.
12. Ender A, Mehl A. Influence of scanning strategies on the accuracy of digital
the exact position of the point set affected the accuracy intraoral scanning systems. Int J Comput Dent 2012;16:11-21.
more than the quantity of the point set. 13. International Organization for Standardization. ISO-5725e1. Accuracy
(trueness and precision) of measurement methods and resultsePart 1: general
The main limitation of this in vitro study is that the principles and definitions. Geneva: ISO; 1994. Available at: http://www.iso.
effects of intraoral environmental factors were excluded. org/iso/store.htm. Last accessed December 22, 2015.
14. International Organization for Standardization. ISO-12836. Digitizing de-
Future research evaluating and comparing specimens vices for CAD/CAM systems for indirect dental restorations e Test methods
containing prepared teeth would be useful to investigate for assessing accuracy. Geneva: ISO; 2012. Available at: http://www.iso.org/
iso/store.htm. Last accessed December 22, 2015.
accuracy in the clinical setting. 15. Sandrik JL, Sarna T. Temperature of elastomeric impression materials while
setting in the mouth. J Dent Res 1980;59:1985-6.
16. Wöstmann B, Rehmann P, Balkenhol M. Accuracy of impressions obtained
CONCLUSIONS with dual-arch trays. Int J Prosthodont 2009;22:158-60.
17. Caputi S, Varvara G. Dimensional accuracy of resultant casts made by
Within the limitations of the current study, the following a monophase, one-step and two-step, and a novel two-step putty/
light-body impression technique: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent 2008;99:
conclusions may be drawn. Digital impressions obtained 274-81.
by the Omnicam intraoral video scanner were more ac-
curate than those obtained by the Bluecam intraoral still Corresponding author:
image scanner and had the advantage of covering long- Dr Woong-Chul Kim
Department of Dental Laboratory Science and Engineering
span areas. College of Health Science, Korea University
Anam-dong 5-ga, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul 136-072
Republic of Korea
REFERENCES Email: kuc2842@korea.ac.kr