Evaluation of the influence of the impression technique, scanning direction and type of scanner on the accuracy of the final model

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Viegas, Diogo Cabecinha
Data de Publicação: 2020
Outros Autores: Mourão, João Tiago, Roque, Joao Carlos, Riquieri, Hilton, Fernandes, João, Arrobas, Fernando Vasconcelos, Diamantino, Pedro Jacy Santos, Saavedra, Guilherme S. F. Anzaloni
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Brazilian Dental Science
Texto Completo: https://ojs.ict.unesp.br/index.php/cob/article/view/2179
Resumo: Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the influence of the type of scanner and scanning direction on the accuracy of the final cast. Material and Methods: A partial master cast was used as a reference. A total of 128 scans were obtained and divided into two groups: the conventional method and the digital method. The digital group was divided into three groups: TRIOS 3, Omnicam and CS 3600. Each of these groups was subdivided according to the scanning direction, and each scan was overlaid on the digital reference cast to measure the trueness and precision of the procedures. Results: The overall precision values for the type of impression were 59.89 ± 13.08 mm for conventional and 13.42 ± 4.28 mm for digital; the values for trueness were 49.37 ± 19.13 mm for conventional and 53.53 ± 4.97 mm for digital; the scanning direction trueness values were 53.05 ± 4.36 mm for continuous and 54.03 ± 5.52 mm for segmented; and the precision values were 14.18 ± 4.67 mm for continuous and 12.67 ± 3.75 mm for segmented (p> 0.05). For the scanner type, the trueness values were 50.06 ± 2.65 mm for Trios 3, 57.45 ± 4.63 mm for Omnicam, and 52.57 ± 4.65 mm for Carestream; and those for precision were 11.7 ± 2.07 mm for Trios 3, 10.09 ± 2.24 mm for Omnicam, and 18.49 ± 2.42 mm for Carestream (p <0.05). Conclusions: The digital impression method is the most favorable method regarding precision; in terms of trueness, there are no differences between the types of impressions. KEYWORDS Conventional impression; Intra oral impression; Accuracy; Trueness.
id UNESP-20_ae31cff25c2c08f008063c580d6865bd
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/2179
network_acronym_str UNESP-20
network_name_str Brazilian Dental Science
repository_id_str
spelling Evaluation of the influence of the impression technique, scanning direction and type of scanner on the accuracy of the final modelObjective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the influence of the type of scanner and scanning direction on the accuracy of the final cast. Material and Methods: A partial master cast was used as a reference. A total of 128 scans were obtained and divided into two groups: the conventional method and the digital method. The digital group was divided into three groups: TRIOS 3, Omnicam and CS 3600. Each of these groups was subdivided according to the scanning direction, and each scan was overlaid on the digital reference cast to measure the trueness and precision of the procedures. Results: The overall precision values for the type of impression were 59.89 ± 13.08 mm for conventional and 13.42 ± 4.28 mm for digital; the values for trueness were 49.37 ± 19.13 mm for conventional and 53.53 ± 4.97 mm for digital; the scanning direction trueness values were 53.05 ± 4.36 mm for continuous and 54.03 ± 5.52 mm for segmented; and the precision values were 14.18 ± 4.67 mm for continuous and 12.67 ± 3.75 mm for segmented (p> 0.05). For the scanner type, the trueness values were 50.06 ± 2.65 mm for Trios 3, 57.45 ± 4.63 mm for Omnicam, and 52.57 ± 4.65 mm for Carestream; and those for precision were 11.7 ± 2.07 mm for Trios 3, 10.09 ± 2.24 mm for Omnicam, and 18.49 ± 2.42 mm for Carestream (p <0.05). Conclusions: The digital impression method is the most favorable method regarding precision; in terms of trueness, there are no differences between the types of impressions. KEYWORDS Conventional impression; Intra oral impression; Accuracy; Trueness.Institute of Science and Technology of São José dos Campos2020-12-22info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://ojs.ict.unesp.br/index.php/cob/article/view/217910.14295/bds.2021.v24i1.2179Brazilian Dental Science; Vol. 24 No. 1 (2021): Jan - Mar / 2021 - published Dec 2020; 13 pBrazilian Dental Science; v. 24 n. 1 (2021): Jan - Mar / 2021 - published Dec 2020; 13 p2178-6011reponame:Brazilian Dental Scienceinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho (UNESP)instacron:UNESPenghttps://ojs.ict.unesp.br/index.php/cob/article/view/2179/4255Copyright (c) 2020 Brazilian Dental Scienceinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessViegas, Diogo CabecinhaMourão, João TiagoRoque, Joao CarlosRiquieri, HiltonFernandes, JoãoArrobas, Fernando VasconcelosDiamantino, Pedro Jacy SantosSaavedra, Guilherme S. F. Anzaloni2021-03-30T12:45:03Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/2179Revistahttp://bds.ict.unesp.br/PUBhttp://ojs.fosjc.unesp.br/index.php/index/oaisergio@fosjc.unesp.br||sergio@fosjc.unesp.br2178-60112178-6011opendoar:2022-11-08T16:30:32.360613Brazilian Dental Science - Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho (UNESP)true
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Evaluation of the influence of the impression technique, scanning direction and type of scanner on the accuracy of the final model
title Evaluation of the influence of the impression technique, scanning direction and type of scanner on the accuracy of the final model
spellingShingle Evaluation of the influence of the impression technique, scanning direction and type of scanner on the accuracy of the final model
Viegas, Diogo Cabecinha
title_short Evaluation of the influence of the impression technique, scanning direction and type of scanner on the accuracy of the final model
title_full Evaluation of the influence of the impression technique, scanning direction and type of scanner on the accuracy of the final model
title_fullStr Evaluation of the influence of the impression technique, scanning direction and type of scanner on the accuracy of the final model
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the influence of the impression technique, scanning direction and type of scanner on the accuracy of the final model
title_sort Evaluation of the influence of the impression technique, scanning direction and type of scanner on the accuracy of the final model
author Viegas, Diogo Cabecinha
author_facet Viegas, Diogo Cabecinha
Mourão, João Tiago
Roque, Joao Carlos
Riquieri, Hilton
Fernandes, João
Arrobas, Fernando Vasconcelos
Diamantino, Pedro Jacy Santos
Saavedra, Guilherme S. F. Anzaloni
author_role author
author2 Mourão, João Tiago
Roque, Joao Carlos
Riquieri, Hilton
Fernandes, João
Arrobas, Fernando Vasconcelos
Diamantino, Pedro Jacy Santos
Saavedra, Guilherme S. F. Anzaloni
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Viegas, Diogo Cabecinha
Mourão, João Tiago
Roque, Joao Carlos
Riquieri, Hilton
Fernandes, João
Arrobas, Fernando Vasconcelos
Diamantino, Pedro Jacy Santos
Saavedra, Guilherme S. F. Anzaloni
description Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the influence of the type of scanner and scanning direction on the accuracy of the final cast. Material and Methods: A partial master cast was used as a reference. A total of 128 scans were obtained and divided into two groups: the conventional method and the digital method. The digital group was divided into three groups: TRIOS 3, Omnicam and CS 3600. Each of these groups was subdivided according to the scanning direction, and each scan was overlaid on the digital reference cast to measure the trueness and precision of the procedures. Results: The overall precision values for the type of impression were 59.89 ± 13.08 mm for conventional and 13.42 ± 4.28 mm for digital; the values for trueness were 49.37 ± 19.13 mm for conventional and 53.53 ± 4.97 mm for digital; the scanning direction trueness values were 53.05 ± 4.36 mm for continuous and 54.03 ± 5.52 mm for segmented; and the precision values were 14.18 ± 4.67 mm for continuous and 12.67 ± 3.75 mm for segmented (p> 0.05). For the scanner type, the trueness values were 50.06 ± 2.65 mm for Trios 3, 57.45 ± 4.63 mm for Omnicam, and 52.57 ± 4.65 mm for Carestream; and those for precision were 11.7 ± 2.07 mm for Trios 3, 10.09 ± 2.24 mm for Omnicam, and 18.49 ± 2.42 mm for Carestream (p <0.05). Conclusions: The digital impression method is the most favorable method regarding precision; in terms of trueness, there are no differences between the types of impressions. KEYWORDS Conventional impression; Intra oral impression; Accuracy; Trueness.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020-12-22
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://ojs.ict.unesp.br/index.php/cob/article/view/2179
10.14295/bds.2021.v24i1.2179
url https://ojs.ict.unesp.br/index.php/cob/article/view/2179
identifier_str_mv 10.14295/bds.2021.v24i1.2179
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://ojs.ict.unesp.br/index.php/cob/article/view/2179/4255
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2020 Brazilian Dental Science
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2020 Brazilian Dental Science
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Institute of Science and Technology of São José dos Campos
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Institute of Science and Technology of São José dos Campos
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Dental Science; Vol. 24 No. 1 (2021): Jan - Mar / 2021 - published Dec 2020; 13 p
Brazilian Dental Science; v. 24 n. 1 (2021): Jan - Mar / 2021 - published Dec 2020; 13 p
2178-6011
reponame:Brazilian Dental Science
instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho (UNESP)
instacron:UNESP
instname_str Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho (UNESP)
instacron_str UNESP
institution UNESP
reponame_str Brazilian Dental Science
collection Brazilian Dental Science
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian Dental Science - Universidade Estadual Paulista Júlio de Mesquita Filho (UNESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv sergio@fosjc.unesp.br||sergio@fosjc.unesp.br
_version_ 1788346901794390016