We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
Quintessence International
Login:
username:

password:

Plattform:

Forgotten password?

Registration

Quintessence Int 47 (2016), No. 4     24. Mar. 2016
Quintessence Int 47 (2016), No. 4  (24.03.2016)

Page 343-349, doi:10.3290/j.qi.a35524, PubMed:26824085


Impact of digital intraoral scan strategies on the impression accuracy using the TRIOS Pod scanner
Müller, Philipp / Ender, Andreas / Joda, Tim / Katsoulis, Joannis
Objectives: Little information is available on the impact of different scan strategies on the accuracy of full-arch scans with intraoral scanners. The aim of this in-vitro study was to investigate the trueness and precision of full-arch maxillary digital impressions comparing three scan strategies.
Method and Materials: Three scan strategies (A, B, and C) were applied each five times on one single model (A, first buccal surfaces, return from occlusal-palatal; B, first occlusal-palatal, return buccal; C, S-type one-way). The TRIOS Pod scanner (3shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) with a color detector was used for these digital impressions. A cast of a maxillary dentate jaw was fabricated and scanned with an industrial reference scanner. This full-arch data record was digitally superimposed with the test scans (trueness) and within-group comparison was performed for each group (precision). The values within the 90/10 percentiles from the digital superimposition were used for calculation and group comparisons with nonparametric tests (ANOVA, post-hoc Bonferroni).
Results: The trueness (mean ± standard deviation) was 17.9 ± 16.4 μm for scan strategy A, 17.1 ± 13.7 μm for B, and 26.8 ± 14.7 μm for C without statistically significant difference. The precision was lowest for scan strategy A (35.0 ± 51.1 μm) and significantly different to B (7.9 ± 5.6 μm) and C (8.5 ± 6.3 μm).
Conclusions: Scan strategy B may be recommended as it provides the highest trueness and precision in full-arch scans and therefore minimizes inaccuracies in the final reconstruction.

Keywords: accuracy, digital impression, intraoral scan, precision, strategy, trueness