Cargando…

Computerized Casts for Orthodontic Purpose Using Powder-Free Intraoral Scanners: Accuracy, Execution Time, and Patient Feedback

INTRODUCTION: Intraoral scanners allow direct images of oral situation, with fewer steps than conventional impressions. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of digital impressions, traditional impressions, and digitalization of full-arch gypsum models, to evaluate timing of differen...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sfondrini, Maria Francesca, Gandini, Paola, Malfatto, Maurizio, Di Corato, Francesco, Trovati, Federico, Scribante, Andrea
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5937598/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29850512
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/4103232
_version_ 1783320654310801408
author Sfondrini, Maria Francesca
Gandini, Paola
Malfatto, Maurizio
Di Corato, Francesco
Trovati, Federico
Scribante, Andrea
author_facet Sfondrini, Maria Francesca
Gandini, Paola
Malfatto, Maurizio
Di Corato, Francesco
Trovati, Federico
Scribante, Andrea
author_sort Sfondrini, Maria Francesca
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Intraoral scanners allow direct images of oral situation, with fewer steps than conventional impressions. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of digital impressions, traditional impressions, and digitalization of full-arch gypsum models, to evaluate timing of different methods and finally to study perception of patients about conventional and digital impression techniques. METHODS: Dental arches of fourteen patients were evaluated by alginate impression, titanium dioxide powder-free intraoral scanning (Trios, 3Shape), and digitalization obtained from gypsum models using the same scanner. Conventional and digital techniques were evaluated through measurements (lower and upper arch anteroposterior length, lower and upper intercanine distance, and lower and upper intermolar distance) with a caliber for analogic models and using a computer software for digital models (Ortho Analyzer, Great Lakes Orthodontics). In addition, chairside and processing times were recorded. Finally, each patient completed a VAS questionnaire to evaluate comfort. Statistical analyses were performed with ANOVA and Tukey tests for accuracy measurements and paired t-test for times and VAS scores. Significance was predetermined at P < 0.05. RESULTS: The measurements obtained with intraoral scanning, gypsum models after conventional impression, and digitalized gypsum models were not significantly different. Both chairside and processing times of digital scanning were shorter than the traditional method. VAS reporting patients comfort were significantly higher when evaluating digital impression. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoral scanners used for orthodontic applications provide useful data in clinical practice, comparable to conventional impression. This technology is more time efficient than traditional impression and comfortable for patients. Further evolution with more accurate and faster scanners could in future replace traditional impression methods.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5937598
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59375982018-05-30 Computerized Casts for Orthodontic Purpose Using Powder-Free Intraoral Scanners: Accuracy, Execution Time, and Patient Feedback Sfondrini, Maria Francesca Gandini, Paola Malfatto, Maurizio Di Corato, Francesco Trovati, Federico Scribante, Andrea Biomed Res Int Research Article INTRODUCTION: Intraoral scanners allow direct images of oral situation, with fewer steps than conventional impressions. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of digital impressions, traditional impressions, and digitalization of full-arch gypsum models, to evaluate timing of different methods and finally to study perception of patients about conventional and digital impression techniques. METHODS: Dental arches of fourteen patients were evaluated by alginate impression, titanium dioxide powder-free intraoral scanning (Trios, 3Shape), and digitalization obtained from gypsum models using the same scanner. Conventional and digital techniques were evaluated through measurements (lower and upper arch anteroposterior length, lower and upper intercanine distance, and lower and upper intermolar distance) with a caliber for analogic models and using a computer software for digital models (Ortho Analyzer, Great Lakes Orthodontics). In addition, chairside and processing times were recorded. Finally, each patient completed a VAS questionnaire to evaluate comfort. Statistical analyses were performed with ANOVA and Tukey tests for accuracy measurements and paired t-test for times and VAS scores. Significance was predetermined at P < 0.05. RESULTS: The measurements obtained with intraoral scanning, gypsum models after conventional impression, and digitalized gypsum models were not significantly different. Both chairside and processing times of digital scanning were shorter than the traditional method. VAS reporting patients comfort were significantly higher when evaluating digital impression. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoral scanners used for orthodontic applications provide useful data in clinical practice, comparable to conventional impression. This technology is more time efficient than traditional impression and comfortable for patients. Further evolution with more accurate and faster scanners could in future replace traditional impression methods. Hindawi 2018-04-23 /pmc/articles/PMC5937598/ /pubmed/29850512 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/4103232 Text en Copyright © 2018 Maria Francesca Sfondrini et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Sfondrini, Maria Francesca
Gandini, Paola
Malfatto, Maurizio
Di Corato, Francesco
Trovati, Federico
Scribante, Andrea
Computerized Casts for Orthodontic Purpose Using Powder-Free Intraoral Scanners: Accuracy, Execution Time, and Patient Feedback
title Computerized Casts for Orthodontic Purpose Using Powder-Free Intraoral Scanners: Accuracy, Execution Time, and Patient Feedback
title_full Computerized Casts for Orthodontic Purpose Using Powder-Free Intraoral Scanners: Accuracy, Execution Time, and Patient Feedback
title_fullStr Computerized Casts for Orthodontic Purpose Using Powder-Free Intraoral Scanners: Accuracy, Execution Time, and Patient Feedback
title_full_unstemmed Computerized Casts for Orthodontic Purpose Using Powder-Free Intraoral Scanners: Accuracy, Execution Time, and Patient Feedback
title_short Computerized Casts for Orthodontic Purpose Using Powder-Free Intraoral Scanners: Accuracy, Execution Time, and Patient Feedback
title_sort computerized casts for orthodontic purpose using powder-free intraoral scanners: accuracy, execution time, and patient feedback
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5937598/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29850512
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/4103232
work_keys_str_mv AT sfondrinimariafrancesca computerizedcastsfororthodonticpurposeusingpowderfreeintraoralscannersaccuracyexecutiontimeandpatientfeedback
AT gandinipaola computerizedcastsfororthodonticpurposeusingpowderfreeintraoralscannersaccuracyexecutiontimeandpatientfeedback
AT malfattomaurizio computerizedcastsfororthodonticpurposeusingpowderfreeintraoralscannersaccuracyexecutiontimeandpatientfeedback
AT dicoratofrancesco computerizedcastsfororthodonticpurposeusingpowderfreeintraoralscannersaccuracyexecutiontimeandpatientfeedback
AT trovatifederico computerizedcastsfororthodonticpurposeusingpowderfreeintraoralscannersaccuracyexecutiontimeandpatientfeedback
AT scribanteandrea computerizedcastsfororthodonticpurposeusingpowderfreeintraoralscannersaccuracyexecutiontimeandpatientfeedback