Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Accuracy, reproducibility, and time efficiency of dental measurements using different technologies.
Grünheid, Thorsten; Patel, Nishant; De Felippe, Nanci L; Wey, Andrew; Gaillard, Philippe R; Larson, Brent E.
Afiliação
  • Grünheid T; Assistant professor, Division of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn. Electronic address: tgruenhe@umn.edu.
  • Patel N; Private practice, Bolingbrook, Ill.
  • De Felippe NL; Clinical associate professor, Division of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn.
  • Wey A; Research assistant, Biostatistical Design and Analysis Center, Clinical and Translational Science Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn.
  • Gaillard PR; Research associate, Biostatistical Design and Analysis Center, Clinical and Translational Science Institute, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn.
  • Larson BE; Associate professor and director, Division of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop ; 145(2): 157-64, 2014 Feb.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24485729
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Historically, orthodontists have taken dental measurements on plaster models. Technological advances now allow orthodontists to take these measurements on digital models. In this study, we aimed to assess the accuracy, reproducibility, and time efficiency of dental measurements taken on 3 types of digital models.

METHODS:

emodels (GeoDigm, Falcon Heights, Minn), SureSmile models (OraMetrix, Richardson, Tex), and AnatoModels (Anatomage, San Jose, Calif) were made for 30 patients. Mesiodistal tooth-width measurements taken on these digital models were timed and compared with those on the corresponding plaster models, which were used as the gold standard. Accuracy and reproducibility were assessed using the Bland-Altman method. Differences in time efficiency were tested for statistical significance with 1-way analysis of variance.

RESULTS:

Measurements on SureSmile models were the most accurate, followed by those on emodels and AnatoModels. Measurements taken on SureSmile models were also the most reproducible. Measurements taken on SureSmile models and emodels were significantly faster than those taken on AnatoModels and plaster models.

CONCLUSIONS:

Tooth-width measurements on digital models can be as accurate as, and might be more reproducible and significantly faster than, those taken on plaster models. Of the models studied, the SureSmile models provided the best combination of accuracy, reproducibility, and time efficiency of measurement.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Tecnologia Odontológica / Odontometria Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2014 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Tecnologia Odontológica / Odontometria Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2014 Tipo de documento: Article