• 디지털융복합연구
• /
• 제16권4호
• /
• pp.195-203
• /
• 2018

본 연구에서는 우리나라 치과임상에서 사용되고 있는 치과인상재의 종류 및 채득 방법에 대해 조사해보기 위해 실시되었으며, 설문조사는 전국치과병(의)원 치과의사를 대상으로 기관당 1부씩 자기기입식 방법을 통해 조사하였으며, 수집된 자료는 SPSS 20.0을 사용하여 통계 처리하여 분석하였다. 그 결과 인상재의 종류별 진료 내용에서는 대부분의 진료에서 부가중합형 인상재의 사용빈도가 가장 높았다. 인상채득방법은 점도에 분류에 의한 light body와 heavy body를 사용하는 흐름성이 다른 인상재를 한번에 채득하는 방법을 가장 선호하는 것을 확인할 수 있었고, 임플란트 인상채득방법에는 직접법과 간접법 모두 흐름성이 다른 두 가지 고무인상재를 한번에 채득하는 방법이 가장 선호되었다. 일반적인 특성에 따른 주조수복재와 보철물의 인상채득방법에서는 각각 연령과 임상경력에서 통계적으로 유의한 차이를 보였다. 본 연구결과는 임상에서 주로 사용되고 있는 인상재의 종류를 파악해보고 치과전문가에게 요구되는 인상재의 선호도에 따른 이론과 실무에 대한 업무개발에 도움이 될 수 있으리라 판단된다.

• Journal of Korean Dental Science
• /
• 제9권2호
• /
• pp.74-80
• /
• 2016

Even though an immediate denture (ID) is a practical prosthesis, fabricating an ID may be challenging, as unexpected removals of periodontally compromised teeth may occur during an impression procedure. This clinical report introduces a digital approach to a maxillary ID. An intraoral scanner was applied to prevent accidental extraction. A physical cast and a resin pattern of a framework were fabricated with rapid prototyping technology. A proper border and retention was also achieved by an altered cast impression.

• 대한치과기공학회지
• /
• 제35권1호
• /
• pp.37-42
• /
• 2013

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the repeatability of dental white light scanner. Methods: The impression(Zerosil, Dreve, Germany) were digitized in white light scanner(Identica, Medit, Korea) to create 3-dimensional surface-models. The distribution of the discrepancies between the number of points in the corresponding CRM models and the point clouds in the others were measured by a matching-software(PowerInspect 2012, Delcam Plc, UK). The discriptive statistics were used for statistical analysis(SPSS 20.0). Results: The measurement of repeatablity showed very good reliability. The mean(SD) discrepancy value on the white light scanner digital models was 8.7(0.67) ${\mu}m$, based on SD and absolute mean values. Conclusion: These in vitro studies showed that repeatability of dental white light scanner is high reliability. These results can be confirmed in further clinical studies.

• 치위생과학회지
• /
• 제15권5호
• /
• pp.673-678
• /
• 2015

본 연구는 최신 경향의 구강 내 스캐너로 채득된 3차원 디지털 인상의 정확도와 신뢰도를 평가하기 위해 4가지 계측 지점을 통하여 분석하였다. 주 모형과 비교하였을 때, 디지털 인상이 작게 계측되는 경향을 나타내었고, 각 계측지점별로 0.06~0.12 mm 범위의 차이를 보였다. 선행연구의 결과에 의해 임상적으로 오차범위를 허용할 수 있는 것으로 나타났으며, 환자의 진단이나 치아 교정치료 계획 수립 시 사용되는 모형에는 큰 영향이 없음을 확인할 수 있었다. 실험에서는 구강 내 상황이나 해부학적 구조를 무시하고 진행하였지만, 실제 임상에서 사용 시에는 구강 내 협소한 공간, 타액 등으로 인한 치아면의 난반사 증가, 혀 등의 해부학적 구조물로 인한 작업 방해 등의 여러 가지 요인이 인상과정에 영향을 줄 수 있을 것이라 판단된다. 추후 실험에서는 가능한 구강 내 상황을 재현한 상태에서 실험을 진행하면 좀 더 임상 적용에 도움이 될 것으로 생각된다.

• 한국치위생학회지
• /
• 제12권6호
• /
• pp.1082-1089
• /
• 2012

Objectives : The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of digitized stone models, impression materials compared to the master model and the reliability of the computer aided analysis. Methods : A master model(500B-1, Nissin dental product, Japan) with the prepared lower full arch tooth was used. Ten vinyl polysiloxane impressions(Examix$^{(R)}$, GC Industrial Corp, Japan) of master model were taken and type IV stone(aesthetic-base gold$^{(R)}$, Dentona, Germany) were poured in stone models. The linear distance between the reference points were measured and analyzed on the Delcam Copycad$^{(R)}$(Delcam plc, UK). The t-student test for paired samples was used for statistical analysis. Results : The mean differences to master model for stone model and impression material were 0.11~0.19mm, and 0.19~0.29mm, respectively. There were statistical differences in dimensional accuracy for full arch impression between master model and stone model/impressions(p<.05). Conclusions : Two different scanning methods showed clinically acceptable accuracy of full arch digital impression produced by them. These results will have to be confirmed in further clinical studies.

• 대한치과보철학회지
• /
• 제54권4호
• /
• pp.379-386
• /
• 2016

목적: 본 연구에서는 전통적 인상채득과 디지털 인상채득을 모두 경험한 환자들의 만족도를 조사하여 다양한 항목에 대하여 비교 분석하고자 하였다. 재료 및 방법: 구강 내 디지털 인상채득의 방법을 사용하는 5개의 치과병원에서, 보철 치료를 위해 기존의 인상재를 이용한 방법과 디지털 인상채득을 모두 경험한 만 20세 이상의 성인 환자 170명을 대상으로, 2015년 10월부터 2016년 4월까지 설문조사를 실시하였다. 총128부의 설문지를 분석 자료로 이용하였으며, 빈도분석, 다중응답 빈도분석, 기술통계, 비모수 검정, 교차 분석을 시행하였고, 유의수준은 0.05로 설정하였다. 결과: 디지털 인상채득의 이유는 '임플란트치료'(43.8%), '크라운치료'(30.5%), '인레이치료'(15.6%) 순서로 나타났다. 전통적 인상채득의 평균 만족도보다 디지털 인상채득의 평균 만족도가 유의하게 더 높았다 (P<.05). 재선택하고 싶은 인상채득 방법으로는 전통적 인상채득(11.7%) 보다 디지털 인상채득(60.2%)이 더 높게 나타났다. 디지털 인상채득을 재선택한 이유로는 '구토반사가 없어서'(35.1%), '3D디지털 스캔이라 신뢰가 가서'(33.8%), '시간이짧아서'(33.8%) 순으로 나타났다. 결론: 환자 만족도 및 다시 선택하고 싶은 인상채득의 방법으로 전통적 인상채득 보다 디지털 인상채득의 선택이 더 높게 나타났다.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• 제14권4호
• /
• pp.236-249
• /
• 2022

PURPOSE. The present study compared the accuracy between digital and conventional implant impressions. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The experimental models were divided into six groups depending on the implant location and the scanning span. Digital impressions were captured using the intraoral optical scanner TRIOS (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark). Conventional impressions were taken with the monophase impression material based on addition-cured silicones, Honigum-Mono (DMG, Hamburg, Germany). A high-precision laboratory scanner D900 (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) was used to obtain digital data of resin models and stone casts. Surface tessellation language (STL) datasets from scanner were imported into the analysis software Geomagic Qualify 14 (3D Systems, Rock Hill, SC, USA), and scan body deviations were determined through two-dimensional and three-dimensional analyses. Each scan body was measured five times. The Sidak t test was used to analyze the experimental data. RESULTS. Implant position and scanning distance affected the impression accuracy. For a unilateral arch implant and the mandible models with two implants, no significant difference was observed in the accuracy between the digital and conventional implant impressions on scan bodies; however, the corresponding differences for trans-arch implants and mandible with six implants were extremely significant (P<.001). CONCLUSION. For short-span scanning, the accuracy of digital and conventional implant impressions did not differ significantly. For long-span scanning, the precision of digital impressions was significantly inferior to that of the traditional impressions.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• 제6권1호
• /
• pp.1-7
• /
• 2014

PURPOSE. The accuracy of a gypsum model (GM), which was taken using a conventional silicone impression technique, was compared with that of a polyurethane model (PM), which was taken using an iTero$^{TM}$ digital impression system. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The maxillary first molar artificial tooth was selected as the reference tooth. The GMs were fabricated through a silicone impression of a reference tooth, and PMs were fabricated by a digital impression (n=9, in each group). The reference tooth and experimental models were scanned using a 3 shape convince$^{TM}$ scan system. Each GM and PM image was superimposed on the registered reference model (RM) and 2D images were obtained. The discrepancies of the points registered on the superimposed images were measured and defined as GM-RM group and PM-RM group. Statistical analysis was performed using a Student's T-test (${\alpha}=0.05$). RESULTS. A comparison of the absolute value of the discrepancy revealed a significant difference between the two groups only at the occlusal surface. The GM group showed a smaller mean discrepancy than the PM group. Significant differences in the GM-RM group and PM-RM group were observed in the margins (point a and f), mesial mid-axial wall (point b) and occlusal surfaces (point c and d). CONCLUSION. Under the conditions examined, the digitally fabricated polyurethane model showed a tendency for a reduced size in the margin than the reference tooth. The conventional gypsum model showed a smaller discrepancy on the occlusal surface than the polyurethane model.

• 구강회복응용과학지
• /
• 제35권2호
• /
• pp.55-63
• /
• 2019

본 논문은 기존에 선행되었던 연구들을 바탕으로 디지털 모형의 정확도를 평가하는 여러 가지 방법에 관하여 정리하였다. 디지털 모형의 정확도 평가 시, 시험자 교육과 인공적 지표의 사용을 통해 오차를 줄일 수 있다. 디지털 치아 모형의 정확도 평가법은 크게 선형 측정법, 2차원 단면 분석법, 3차원 최적합 분석법으로 분류할 수 있다. 스캐너의 기술이 발전함에 따라 디지털 인상 기술과 전통적 인상법의 정확도를 비교하는 많은 연구들이 이루어지고 있다. 다양한 방법을 이용하여 디지털 모형의 정확도를 평가할 수 있으며, 앞으로 스캐너의 기술 향상 및 3차원 모형 분석 소프트웨어의 개발에 따라 디지털 모형의 정확도 평가 방법이 더욱 효과적으로 변화할 것이라 생각된다. 이 논문에서는 디지털 모형의 정확도를 평가하는 방법들에 대해 소개하고, 각각의 상황에 따른 효과적인 정확도 분석법에 대해 알아보고자 한다.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• 제16권1호
• /
• pp.57-65
• /
• 2024

PURPOSE. The aim of this stuldy was to compare the clinical marginal fit of CAD-CAM inlays obtained from intraoral digital impression or addition silicone impression techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The study included 31 inlays for prosthodontics purposes of 31 patients: 15 based on intraoral digital impressions (DI group); and 16 based on a conventional impression technique (CI group). Inlays included occlusal and a non-occlusal surface. Inlays were milled in ceramic. The inlay-teeth interface was replicated by placing each inlay in its corresponding uncemented clinical preparation and taking interface impressions with silicone material from occlusal and free surfaces. Interface analysis was made using white light confocal microscopy (WLCM) (scanning area: 694 × 510 ㎛²) from the impression samples. The gap size and the inlay overextension were measured from the microscopy topographies. For analytical purposes (i.e., 95-%-confidence intervals calculations and P-value calculations), the procedure REGRESS in SUDAAN was used to account for clustering (i.e., multiple measurements). For p-value calculation, the log transformation of the dependent variables was used to normalize the distributions. RESULTS. Marginal fit values for occlusal and free surfaces were affected by the type of impression. There were no differences between surfaces (occlusal vs. free). Gap obtained for DI group was 164 ± 84 ㎛ and that for CI group was 209 ± 104 ㎛, and there were statistical differences between them (p = .041). Mean overextension values were 60 ± 59 ㎛ for DI group and 67 ± 73 ㎛ for CI group, and there were no differences between then (p = .553). CONCLUSION. Digital impression achieved inlays with higher clinical marginal fit and performed better than the conventional silicone materials.