Accuracy of 3D white light scanning of abutment teeth impressions: Evaluation of trueness and precision

Jin Hun Jeon, Hae-Young Kim, Ji Hwan Kim, Woong Chul Kim

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of digitizing dental impressions of abutment teeth using a white light scanner and to compare the findings among teeth types. Materials and methods. To assess precision, impressions of the canine, premolar, and molar prepared to receive all-ceramic crowns were repeatedly scanned to obtain five sets of 3-D data (STL files). Point clouds were compared and error sizes were measured (n=10 per type). Next, to evaluate trueness, impressions of teeth were rotated by 10°-20° and scanned. The obtained data were compared with the first set of data for precision assessment, and the error sizes were measured (n=5 per type). The Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to evaluate precision and trueness among three teeth types, and post-hoc comparisons were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction (α=.05). Results. Precision discrepancies for the canine, premolar, and molar were 3.7 μm, 3.2 μm, and 7.3 μm, respectively, indicating the poorest precision for the molar (P < .001). Trueness discrepancies for teeth types were 6.2 μm, 11.2 μm, and 21.8 μm, respectively, indicating the poorest trueness for the molar (P=.007). Conclusion. In respect to accuracy the molar showed the largest discrepancies compared with the canine and premolar. Digitizing of dental impressions of abutment teeth using a white light scanner was assessed to be a highly accurate method and provided discrepancy values in a clinically acceptable range. Further study is needed to improve digitizing performance of white light scanning in axial wall.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)468-473
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Advanced Prosthodontics
Volume6
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014 Jan 1

Fingerprint

Tooth
Light
Dental Abutments
Bicuspid
Canidae
Information Storage and Retrieval
Ceramics
Nonparametric Statistics
Crowns

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry (miscellaneous)
  • Oral Surgery

Cite this

Accuracy of 3D white light scanning of abutment teeth impressions : Evaluation of trueness and precision. / Jeon, Jin Hun; Kim, Hae-Young; Kim, Ji Hwan; Kim, Woong Chul.

In: Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics, Vol. 6, No. 6, 01.01.2014, p. 468-473.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{87db76c5687c447997bc1c847ab6fed3,
title = "Accuracy of 3D white light scanning of abutment teeth impressions: Evaluation of trueness and precision",
abstract = "Purpose. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of digitizing dental impressions of abutment teeth using a white light scanner and to compare the findings among teeth types. Materials and methods. To assess precision, impressions of the canine, premolar, and molar prepared to receive all-ceramic crowns were repeatedly scanned to obtain five sets of 3-D data (STL files). Point clouds were compared and error sizes were measured (n=10 per type). Next, to evaluate trueness, impressions of teeth were rotated by 10°-20° and scanned. The obtained data were compared with the first set of data for precision assessment, and the error sizes were measured (n=5 per type). The Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to evaluate precision and trueness among three teeth types, and post-hoc comparisons were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction (α=.05). Results. Precision discrepancies for the canine, premolar, and molar were 3.7 μm, 3.2 μm, and 7.3 μm, respectively, indicating the poorest precision for the molar (P < .001). Trueness discrepancies for teeth types were 6.2 μm, 11.2 μm, and 21.8 μm, respectively, indicating the poorest trueness for the molar (P=.007). Conclusion. In respect to accuracy the molar showed the largest discrepancies compared with the canine and premolar. Digitizing of dental impressions of abutment teeth using a white light scanner was assessed to be a highly accurate method and provided discrepancy values in a clinically acceptable range. Further study is needed to improve digitizing performance of white light scanning in axial wall.",
keywords = "3D shape data, Accuracy, Impression scanning, Point cloud, Precision and trueness, White light scanner",
author = "Jeon, {Jin Hun} and Hae-Young Kim and Kim, {Ji Hwan} and Kim, {Woong Chul}",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.4047/jap.2014.6.6.468",
language = "English",
volume = "6",
pages = "468--473",
journal = "Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics",
issn = "2005-7806",
publisher = "The Korean Academy of prosthodontics",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Accuracy of 3D white light scanning of abutment teeth impressions

T2 - Evaluation of trueness and precision

AU - Jeon, Jin Hun

AU - Kim, Hae-Young

AU - Kim, Ji Hwan

AU - Kim, Woong Chul

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - Purpose. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of digitizing dental impressions of abutment teeth using a white light scanner and to compare the findings among teeth types. Materials and methods. To assess precision, impressions of the canine, premolar, and molar prepared to receive all-ceramic crowns were repeatedly scanned to obtain five sets of 3-D data (STL files). Point clouds were compared and error sizes were measured (n=10 per type). Next, to evaluate trueness, impressions of teeth were rotated by 10°-20° and scanned. The obtained data were compared with the first set of data for precision assessment, and the error sizes were measured (n=5 per type). The Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to evaluate precision and trueness among three teeth types, and post-hoc comparisons were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction (α=.05). Results. Precision discrepancies for the canine, premolar, and molar were 3.7 μm, 3.2 μm, and 7.3 μm, respectively, indicating the poorest precision for the molar (P < .001). Trueness discrepancies for teeth types were 6.2 μm, 11.2 μm, and 21.8 μm, respectively, indicating the poorest trueness for the molar (P=.007). Conclusion. In respect to accuracy the molar showed the largest discrepancies compared with the canine and premolar. Digitizing of dental impressions of abutment teeth using a white light scanner was assessed to be a highly accurate method and provided discrepancy values in a clinically acceptable range. Further study is needed to improve digitizing performance of white light scanning in axial wall.

AB - Purpose. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of digitizing dental impressions of abutment teeth using a white light scanner and to compare the findings among teeth types. Materials and methods. To assess precision, impressions of the canine, premolar, and molar prepared to receive all-ceramic crowns were repeatedly scanned to obtain five sets of 3-D data (STL files). Point clouds were compared and error sizes were measured (n=10 per type). Next, to evaluate trueness, impressions of teeth were rotated by 10°-20° and scanned. The obtained data were compared with the first set of data for precision assessment, and the error sizes were measured (n=5 per type). The Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to evaluate precision and trueness among three teeth types, and post-hoc comparisons were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction (α=.05). Results. Precision discrepancies for the canine, premolar, and molar were 3.7 μm, 3.2 μm, and 7.3 μm, respectively, indicating the poorest precision for the molar (P < .001). Trueness discrepancies for teeth types were 6.2 μm, 11.2 μm, and 21.8 μm, respectively, indicating the poorest trueness for the molar (P=.007). Conclusion. In respect to accuracy the molar showed the largest discrepancies compared with the canine and premolar. Digitizing of dental impressions of abutment teeth using a white light scanner was assessed to be a highly accurate method and provided discrepancy values in a clinically acceptable range. Further study is needed to improve digitizing performance of white light scanning in axial wall.

KW - 3D shape data

KW - Accuracy

KW - Impression scanning

KW - Point cloud

KW - Precision and trueness

KW - White light scanner

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84920003557&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84920003557&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4047/jap.2014.6.6.468

DO - 10.4047/jap.2014.6.6.468

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84920003557

VL - 6

SP - 468

EP - 473

JO - Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

JF - Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics

SN - 2005-7806

IS - 6

ER -