The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Accuracy and reliability of measurements performed using two different software programs on digital models generated using laser and computed tomography plaster model scanners

  • Camardella, Leonardo T. (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Universidade Federal Fluminense) ;
  • Ongkosuwito, Edwin M. (Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology, Radboud University Medical Center) ;
  • Penning, E. Willemijn (Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology, Radboud University Medical Center) ;
  • Kuijpers-Jagtman, Anne Marie (Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology, Radboud University Medical Center) ;
  • Vilella, Oswaldo V. (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Universidade Federal Fluminense) ;
  • Breuning, K. Hero (Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology, Radboud University Medical Center)
  • Received : 2016.11.01
  • Accepted : 2019.03.14
  • Published : 2020.01.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy and reliability of measurements performed using two different software programs on digital models generated using two types of plaster model scanners (a laser scanner and a computed tomography [CT] scanner). Methods: Thirty plaster models were scanned with a 3Shape laser scanner and with a Flash CT scanner. Two examiners performed measurements on plaster models by using digital calipers and on digital models by using Ortho Analyzer (3Shape) and Digimodel® (OrthoProof) software programs. Forty-two measurements, including tooth diameter, crown height, overjet, overbite, intercanine and intermolar distances, and sagittal relationship, were obtained. Results: Statistically significant differences were not found between the plaster and digital model measurements (ANOVA); however, some discrepancies were clinically relevant. Plaster and digital model measurements made using the two scanning methods showed high intraclass coefficient correlation values and acceptable 95% limits of agreement in the Bland-Altman analysis. The software used did not influence the accuracy of measurements. Conclusions: Digital models generated from plaster casts by using laser and CT scanning and measured using two different software programs are accurate, and the measurements are reliable. Therefore, both fabrication methods and software could be used interchangeably.

Keywords

References

  1. Rischen RJ, Breuning KH, Bronkhorst EM, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. Records needed for orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning: a systematic review. PLoS One 2013;8:e74186. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0074186
  2. Abizadeh N, Moles DR, O'Neill J, Noar JH. Digital versus plaster study models: how accurate and reproducible are they? J Orthod 2012;39:151-9. https://doi.org/10.1179/1465312512Z.00000000023
  3. de Waard O, Rangel FA, Fudalej PS, Bronkhorst EM, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, Breuning KH. Reproducibility and accuracy of linear measurements on dental models derived from cone-beam computed tomography compared with digital dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014;146:328-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.05.026
  4. Torassian G, Kau CH, English JD, Powers J, Bussa HI, Marie Salas-Lopez A, et al. Digital models vs plaster models using alginate and alginate substitute materials. Angle Orthod 2010;80:474-81. https://doi.org/10.2319/042509-229.1
  5. White AJ, Fallis DW, Vandewalle KS. Analysis of intra-arch and interarch measurements from digital models with 2 impression materials and a modeling process based on cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;137:456.e1-9; discussion 456-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.09.019
  6. Ahn HW, Chang YJ, Kim KA, Joo SH, Park YG, Park KH. Measurement of three-dimensional perioral soft tissue changes in dentoalveolar protrusion patients after orthodontic treatment using a structured light scanner. Angle Orthod 2014;84:795-802. https://doi.org/10.2319/112913-877.1
  7. Grunheid T, Patel N, De Felippe NL, Wey A, Gaillard PR, Larson BE. Accuracy, reproducibility, and time efficiency of dental measurements using different technologies. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014; 145:157-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.10.012
  8. Asquith J, Gillgrass T, Mossey P. Three-dimensional imaging of orthodontic models: a pilot study. Eur J Orthod 2007;29:517-22. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjm044
  9. Stevens DR, Flores-Mir C, Nebbe B, Raboud DW, Heo G, Major PW. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of plaster vs digital study models: comparison of peer assessment rating and Bolton analysis and their constituent measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;129:794-803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.08.023
  10. Mullen SR, Martin CA, Ngan P, Gladwin M. Accuracy of space analysis with emodels and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:346-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.08.044
  11. Horton HM, Miller JR, Gaillard PR, Larson BE. Technique comparison for efficient orthodontic tooth measurements using digital models. Angle Orthod 2010;80:254-61. https://doi.org/10.2319/041709-219.1
  12. Goonewardene RW, Goonewardene MS, Razza JM, Murray K. Accuracy and validity of space analysis and irregularity index measurements using digital models. Aust Orthod J 2008;24:83-90.
  13. Sousa MV, Vasconcelos EC, Janson G, Garib D, Pinzan A. Accuracy and reproducibility of 3-dimensional digital model measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012;142:269-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.12.028
  14. Costalos PA, Sarraf K, Cangialosi TJ, Efstratiadis S. Evaluation of the accuracy of digital model analysis for the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system for dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005;128:624-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.08.017
  15. Keating AP, Knox J, Bibb R, Zhurov AI. A comparison of plaster, digital and reconstructed study model accuracy. J Orthod 2008;35:191-201; discussion 175. https://doi.org/10.1179/146531207225022626
  16. Kim J, Heo G, Lagravere MO. Accuracy of laserscanned models compared to plaster models and cone-beam computed tomography. Angle Orthod 2014;84:443-50. https://doi.org/10.2319/051213-365.1
  17. Okunami TR, Kusnoto B, BeGole E, Evans CA, Sadowsky C, Fadavi S. Assessing the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system: digital vs plaster dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;131:51-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.04.042
  18. Bootvong K, Liu Z, McGrath C, Hagg U, Wong RW, Bendeus M, et al. Virtual model analysis as an alternative approach to plaster model analysis: reliability and validity. Eur J Orthod 2010;32:589-95. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjp159
  19. Tomassetti JJ, Taloumis LJ, Denny JM, Fischer JR Jr. A comparison of 3 computerized Bolton toothsize analyses with a commonly used method. Angle Orthod 2001;71:351-7.
  20. Hayashi K, Sachdeva AU, Saitoh S, Lee SP, Kubota T, Mizoguchi I. Assessment of the accuracy and reliability of new 3-dimensional scanning devices. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144:619-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.04.021
  21. Creed B, Kau CH, English JD, Xia JJ, Lee RP. A comparison of the accuracy of linear measurements obtained from cone beam computerized tomography images and digital models. Semin Orthod 2011;17:49-56. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sodo.2010.08.010
  22. Hildebrand JC, Palomo JM, Palomo L, Sivik M, Hans M. Evaluation of a software program for applying the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system to digital casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:283-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.03.035
  23. Santoro M, Galkin S, Teredesai M, Nicolay OF, Cangialosi TJ. Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124:101-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00152-5
  24. De Luca Canto G, Pacheco-Pereira C, Lagravere MO, Flores-Mir C, Major PW. Intra-arch dimensional measurement validity of laser-scanned digital dental models compared with the original plaster models: a systematic review. Orthod Craniofac Res 2015;18:65-76. https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12068
  25. Watanabe-Kanno GA, Abrao J, Miasiro Junior H, Sanchez-Ayala A, Lagravere MO. Reproducibility, reliability and validity of measurements obtained from Cecile3 digital models. Braz Oral Res 2009;23: 288-95. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1806-83242009000300011
  26. Veenema AC, Katsaros C, Boxum SC, Bronkhorst EM, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. Index of complexity, outcome and need scored on plaster and digital models. Eur J Orthod 2009;31:281-6. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjn077
  27. Wan Hassan WN, Othman SA, Chan CS, Ahmad R, Ali SN, Abd Rohim A. Assessing agreement in measurements of orthodontic study models: digital caliper on plaster models vs 3-dimensional software on models scanned by structured-light scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016;150:886-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.04.021
  28. Westerlund A, Tancredi W, Ransjo M, Bresin A, Psonis S, Torgersson O. Digital casts in orthodontics: a comparison of 4 software systems. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2015;147:509-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.11.020
  29. Pandis N. Sample calculations for comparison of 2 means. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012;141:519-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.12.010
  30. Naidu D, Freer TJ. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of the iOC intraoral scanner: a comparison of tooth widths and Bolton ratios. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144:304-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.04.011
  31. Fleming PS, Marinho V, Johal A. Orthodontic measurements on digital study models compared with plaster models: a systematic review. Orthod Craniofac Res 2011;14:1-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-6343.2010.01503.x
  32. Wiranto MG, Engelbrecht WP, Tutein Nolthenius HE, van der Meer WJ, Ren Y. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of linear measurements on digital models obtained from intraoral and cone-beam computed tomography scans of alginate impressions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;143:140-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.06.018

Cited by

  1. Assessment of the accuracy of laser-scanned models and 3-dimensional rendered cone-beam computed tomographic images compared to digital caliper measurements on plaster casts vol.51, 2020, https://doi.org/10.5624/isd.20210142