Accuracy and precision of polyurethane dental arch models fabricated using a three-dimensional subtractive rapid prototyping method with an intraoral scanning technique
2
조회
0
다운로드
14
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and precision of polyurethane (PUT) dental arch models fabricated using a three-dimensional (3D) subtractive rapid prototyping (RP) method with an intraoral scanning technique by comparing linear measurements obtained from PUT models and conventional plaster models. Methods: Ten plaster models were duplicated using a selected standard master model and conventional impression, and 10 PUT models were duplicated using the 3D subtractive RP technique with an oral scanner. Six linear measurements were evaluated in terms of x, y, and z-axes using a non-contact white light scanner. Accuracy was assessed using mean differences between two measurements, and precision was examined using four quantitative methods and the Bland-Altman graphical method. Repeatability was evaluated in terms of intra-examiner variability, and reproducibility was assessed in terms of inter-examiner and inter-method variability. Results: The mean difference between plaster models and PUT models ranged from 0.07 mm to 0.33 mm. Relative measurement errors ranged from 2.2% to 7.6% and intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.93 to 0.96, when comparing plaster models and PUT models. The Bland-Altman plot showed good agreement. Conclusions: The accuracy and precision of PUT dental models for evaluating the performance of oral scanner and subtractive RP technology was acceptable. Because of the recent improvements in block material and computerized numeric control milling machines, the subtractive RP method may be a good choice for dental arch models.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and precision of polyurethane (PUT) dental arch models fabricated using a three-dimensional (3D) subtractive rapid prototyping (RP) method with an intraoral scanning technique by comparing linear measurements obtained from PUT models and conventional plaster models. Methods: Ten plaster models were duplicated using a selected standard master model and conventional impression, and 10 PUT models were duplicated using the 3D subtractive RP technique with an oral scanner. Six linear measurements were evaluated in terms of x, y, and z-axes using a non-contact white light scanner. Accuracy was assessed using mean differences between two measurements, and precision was examined using four quantitative methods and the Bland-Altman graphical method. Repeatability was evaluated in terms of intra-examiner variability, and reproducibility was assessed in terms of inter-examiner and inter-method variability. Results: The mean difference between plaster models and PUT models ranged from 0.07 mm to 0.33 mm. Relative measurement errors ranged from 2.2% to 7.6% and intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.93 to 0.96, when comparing plaster models and PUT models. The Bland-Altman plot showed good agreement. Conclusions: The accuracy and precision of PUT dental models for evaluating the performance of oral scanner and subtractive RP technology was acceptable. Because of the recent improvements in block material and computerized numeric control milling machines, the subtractive RP method may be a good choice for dental arch models.
참고문헌 (30)
- Henkel S, "A better first impression: manufacturing dental restorations using impressions", J Dent Technology, pp.13~16 (2008)
- Jones P, "The iTero optical scanner for use with Invisalign:A descriptive review", Dent Implantol Update, 19, pp.1~4 (2008)
- Barker TM, "Accuracy of stereolithographic models of human anatomy", Australas Radiol, 38, pp.106~111 (1994)
- Kragskov J, "A comparison of three-dimensional computed tomography scans and stereolithographic models for evaluation of craniofacial anomalies", J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 54, pp.402~411 (1996)
- Cuperus AM, "Dental models made with an intraoral scanner: a validation study", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 142, pp.308~313 (2012)
- Lill W, "Reproducibility of three-dimensional CT-assisted model production in the maxillofacial area", Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 30, pp.233~236 (1992)
- Santoro M, "Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 124, pp.101~105 (2003)
- Quimby ML, "The accuracy and reliability of measurements made on computer-based digital models", Angle Orthod, 74, pp.298~303 (2004)
- Zilberman O, "Evaluation of the validity of tooth size and arch width measurements using conventional and three-dimensional virtual orthodontic models", Angle Orthod, 73, pp.301~306 (2003)
- Stevens DR, "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, 129, pp.794~803 (2006)
- Watanabe-Kanno GA, "Reproducibility, reliability and validity of measurements obtained from Cecile3 digital models", Braz Oral Res, 23, pp.288~295 (2009)
- Leifert MF, "Comparison of space analysis evaluations with digital models and plaster dental casts", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 136, pp.16.e1~16.e4 (2009)
- Mullen SR, "Accuracy of space analysis with emodels and plaster models", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 132, pp.346~352 (2007)
- Keating AP, "A comparison of plaster, digital and reconstructed study model accuracy", J Orthod, 35, pp.191~201 (2008)
- Creed B, "A comparison of the accuracy of linear measurements obtained from cone beam computerized tomography images and digital models", Semin Orthod, 17, pp.49~56 (2011)
- Alcan T, "The relationship between digital model accuracy and time-dependent deformation of alginate impressions", Angle Orthod, 79, pp.30~36 (2009)
- Dahlberg G, "Statistical methods for medical and biological students", pp.122~132 (1940), George Allen & Unwin Ltd.
- Henriksen M, "Test-retest reliability of trunk accelerometric gait analysis", Gait Posture, 19, pp.288~297 (2004)
- Bland JM, "Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement", Lancet, 1, pp.307~310 (1986)
- Fleiss JL, "The design and analysis of clinical experiments", pp.76~78 (1986), John Wiley & Sons
- BeGole EA, "Orthodontics: current principles and techniques. 3rd ed", pp.339~352 (2000), Mosby
- Dalstra M, "From alginate impressions to digital virtual models: accuracy and reproducibility", J Orthod, 36, pp.36~41 (2009)
- Mok KH, "Space analysis: a comparison between sonic digitization (DigiGraph Workstation)and the digital caliper", Eur J Orthod, 20, pp.653~661 (1998)
- Asquith J, "Three-dimensional imaging of orthodontic models: a pilot study", Eur J Orthod, 29, pp.517~522 (2007)
- Linnet K, "Limitations of the paired t-test for evaluation of method comparison data", Clin Chem, 45, pp.314~315 (1999)
- Donatelli RE, "How to report reliability in orthodontic research: Part 1", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 144, pp.156~161 (2013)
- Reich S, "Measurement of cement thickness under lithium disilicate crowns using an impression material technique", Clin Oral Investig, 15, pp.521~526 (2011)
- Birnbaum NS, "Dental impressions using 3D digital scanners: virtual becomes reality", Compend Contin Educ Dent, 29, pp.494~ (2008)
- Klein HM, "Pediatric craniofacial surgery: comparison of milling and stereolithography for 3D model manufacturing", Pediatr Radiol, 22, pp.458~460 (1992)
- Petrzelka JE, "Advanced process planning for subtractive rapid prototyping", Rapid Prototyping J, 16, pp.216~224 (2010)