Assessment of the Accuracy of Orthodontic Digital Models in Dental Education
Tolga Şakar 1  
,  
Kaan Orhan 2
,  
Özgür Tosun 1
,  
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
Near East University, N. CYPRUS
2
Ankara University, TURKEY
3
Kocaeli University, TURKEY
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Tolga Şakar   

Near East University, N. CYPRUS
Online publish date: 2017-06-21
Publish date: 2017-08-17
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2017;13(8):5465–5473
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of measurements on 3D models obtained with a CBCT and digital scanner, comparing with analog dental plaster casts and therefore determine whether the aforementioned digital models could be implemented in dental education. A total of 120 archived maxillary plaster models were digitized by using two different CBCT techniques, (NewTom, and 3G Planmeca ProMax 3D), and Cerec Omnicam Digital Scanner, Sirona. The mean absolute values among the plaster models, IDS models, and CBCT scans were in the range of 0.12 mm-0.33 mm. The intraclass correlation coefficients for all measured variables showed high reliability. The mean differences for arch width such as inter-canine, inter-premolar and inter-molar as well as mesiodistal width measurements exhibited a mean difference value higher than 0.3 mm (p˂.05). Digital models acquired from plaster casts were reliable for clinical orthodontic practice. Therefore, the use of digital models provides a reliable alternative to plaster models and it can be used in dental education.
 
REFERENCES (19)
1.
Bell, A., Ayoub, A. F., & Siebert, P. (2003). Assessment of the accuracy of a three-dimensional imaging system for archiving dental study models. J Orthod, 30, 219-23.
 
2.
Hirogaki, Y., Sohmura, T., Satoh, H., Takahashi, J., & Takada, K. (2001). Complete 3-D reconstruction of dental cast shape using perceptual grouping. IEEE Trans Med Imaging, 20, 1093-101.
 
3.
Horton, H. M., Miller, J. R., Gaillard, P. R., & Larson, B. E. (2010). Technique comparison for efficient orthodontic tooth measurements using digital models. Angle Orthod, 80, 254-261.
 
4.
Jiang, T., Lee, S. M., Hou, Y., Chang, X., & Hwang, H. S. (2016). Evaluation of digital dental models obtained from dental cone-beam computed tomography scan of alginate impressions. Korean J Orthod, 46, 129-36.
 
5.
Keating, A. P., Knox, J., Bibb, R., & Zhurov, A.I. (2008). A comparison of plaster digital and reconstructed study model accuracy. J Orthod, 35, 191-201.
 
6.
Kim, J., Heo, G., & Lagravère, M. O. (2014). Accuracy of laser-scanned models compared to plaster models and cone-beam computed tomography. Angle Orthod, 84, 443-50.
 
7.
Lele, S., & Richtsmeier, J. T. (1991). Euclidean distance matrix analysis: A coordinate‐free approach for comparing biological shapes using landmark data. Am J Phys Anthropol, 86, 415-427.
 
8.
Luu, N. S., Nikolcheva, L. G., Retrouvey, J. M., Flores-Mir, C., El-Bialy, T., Carey, J. P., & Major, P. W. (2012). Linear measurements using virtual study models. Angle Orthod, 82, 1098-106.
 
9.
Quimby, M. L., Vig, K. W., Rashid, R. G., & Firestone, A. R. (2004). The accuracy and reliability of measurements made on computer-based digital models. Angle Orthod, 74, 298-303.
 
10.
Rasband, W. S. (1997-2016). ImageJ, U. S. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA, http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/.
 
11.
Rossini, G., Parrini, S., Castroflorio, T., Deregibus, A., & Debernardi, C. L. (2016).Diagnostic accuracy and measurement sensitivity of digital models for orthodontic purposes: A systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 149, 161-70.
 
12.
Schindelin, J., Arganda-Carreras, I., Frise, E., Kaynig, V., Longair, M., Pietzsch, T., Preibisch, S., Rueden, C., Saalfeld, S., Schmid, B., & Tinevez, J. Y. (2012). Fiji: an open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nat Methods, 9, 676-82.
 
13.
Schmid, B., Schindelin, J., Cardona, A., Longair, M., & Heisenberg, M. (2010). A high-level 3D visualization API for Java and ImageJ. BMC Bioinformatics, 11, 274.
 
14.
Sjögren, A. P., Lindgren, J. E., & Huggare, J. Å. (2010). Orthodontic study cast analysis—reproducibility of recordings and agreement between conventional and 3D virtual measurements. J Digit Imaging, 23, 482-492.
 
15.
Sousa, M. V., Vasconcelos, E. C., Janson, G., Garib, D., & Pinzan, A. (2012). Accuracy and reproducibility of 3-dimensional digital model measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 142, 269-73.
 
16.
Torassian, G., Kau, C.H., English, J.D., Powers, J., Bussa, H.I., Marie Salas-Lopez, A., Corbett, J.A. (2010). Digital models vs plaster models using alginate and alginate substitute materials. Angle Orthod, 80, 474-81.
 
17.
Westerlund, A., Tancredi, W., Ransjö, M., Bresin, A., Psonis, S., & Torgersson, O. (2015). Digital casts in orthodontics: A comparison of 4 software systems. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 147, 509-516.
 
18.
White, A. J., Fallis, D. W., & Vandewalle, K. S. (2010). 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, 137, 456.e1-9.
 
19.
Wiranto, M. G., Engelbrecht, W. P., Nolthenius, H. E., van der Meer, W. J., & Ren, Y. (2013). 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, 143, 140-7.
 
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215