Cargando…

Comparison of optical performance among three dental operating microscopes: A pilot study

INTRODUCTION: Two important aspects of the dental operating microscope (DOM) that factor into its overall effectiveness are resolution and depth of field. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the resolution and depth of field of DOMs from three well-known manufacturers...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jalali, Poorya, Kim, Charles, Woodmansey, Karl F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7883792/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33623239
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_191_20
_version_ 1783651284347256832
author Jalali, Poorya
Kim, Charles
Woodmansey, Karl F.
author_facet Jalali, Poorya
Kim, Charles
Woodmansey, Karl F.
author_sort Jalali, Poorya
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Two important aspects of the dental operating microscope (DOM) that factor into its overall effectiveness are resolution and depth of field. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the resolution and depth of field of DOMs from three well-known manufacturers using standardized test targets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A resolution test, using the 1951 USAF Hi-Resolution Target (Edmund Optics, Barrington, NJ), and a depth of field test, using the Depth of Field Target 5-15 (Edmund Optics, Barrington, NJ), were performed by two calibrated observers. Three DOM systems such as Seiler IQ (Seiler Instrument Inc., St. Louis, USA), Global G-Series 6 step (Global Surgical Corp., St. Louis, USA), and Zeiss Extaro 300 (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Oberkochen, Germany) were used to compare the resolution and depth of field. RESULTS: The Zeiss Extaro 300 showed the highest maximum resolution and maximum DOF (64 lp/mm and 17mm, respectively). The Seiler IQ showed the lowest maximum resolution and maximum DOF (35.9 lp/mm and 11 mm, respectively). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, the Zeiss Extaro 300 was superior in terms of resolution and depth of field as compared to the other two DOMs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7883792
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78837922021-02-22 Comparison of optical performance among three dental operating microscopes: A pilot study Jalali, Poorya Kim, Charles Woodmansey, Karl F. J Conserv Dent Original Article INTRODUCTION: Two important aspects of the dental operating microscope (DOM) that factor into its overall effectiveness are resolution and depth of field. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the resolution and depth of field of DOMs from three well-known manufacturers using standardized test targets. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A resolution test, using the 1951 USAF Hi-Resolution Target (Edmund Optics, Barrington, NJ), and a depth of field test, using the Depth of Field Target 5-15 (Edmund Optics, Barrington, NJ), were performed by two calibrated observers. Three DOM systems such as Seiler IQ (Seiler Instrument Inc., St. Louis, USA), Global G-Series 6 step (Global Surgical Corp., St. Louis, USA), and Zeiss Extaro 300 (Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, Oberkochen, Germany) were used to compare the resolution and depth of field. RESULTS: The Zeiss Extaro 300 showed the highest maximum resolution and maximum DOF (64 lp/mm and 17mm, respectively). The Seiler IQ showed the lowest maximum resolution and maximum DOF (35.9 lp/mm and 11 mm, respectively). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of this study, the Zeiss Extaro 300 was superior in terms of resolution and depth of field as compared to the other two DOMs. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020 2021-01-16 /pmc/articles/PMC7883792/ /pubmed/33623239 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_191_20 Text en Copyright: © 2021 Journal of Conservative Dentistry http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Jalali, Poorya
Kim, Charles
Woodmansey, Karl F.
Comparison of optical performance among three dental operating microscopes: A pilot study
title Comparison of optical performance among three dental operating microscopes: A pilot study
title_full Comparison of optical performance among three dental operating microscopes: A pilot study
title_fullStr Comparison of optical performance among three dental operating microscopes: A pilot study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of optical performance among three dental operating microscopes: A pilot study
title_short Comparison of optical performance among three dental operating microscopes: A pilot study
title_sort comparison of optical performance among three dental operating microscopes: a pilot study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7883792/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33623239
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_191_20
work_keys_str_mv AT jalalipoorya comparisonofopticalperformanceamongthreedentaloperatingmicroscopesapilotstudy
AT kimcharles comparisonofopticalperformanceamongthreedentaloperatingmicroscopesapilotstudy
AT woodmanseykarlf comparisonofopticalperformanceamongthreedentaloperatingmicroscopesapilotstudy