An evaluation of the use of digital study models in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning

Angle Orthodontist

Volumn 75, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 300-304

  Rheude, Brian ^a   Sadowsky, P Lionel ^a   Ferriera, Andre ^a   Jacobson, Alex ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM   (United States)

Author keywords

Digital models; Orthodontics

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHI SQUARE TEST; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; EVALUATION; EXPERIENCE; HUMAN; MEDICAL RECORD; ORTHODONTICS; PATIENT SELECTION; PLASTER CAST; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZATION; STANDARDIZATION; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; TREATMENT PLANNING; UNIVERSITY;

EID: 18244388474     PISSN: 00033219     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. Han U. Consistency of orthodontic treatment decisions relative to diagnostic records. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1991;100:212-219.
2. Garino F, Garino GB. Comparison of dental arch measurements between stone and digital casts. World J Orthod. 2002;3:250-254.
3. Caspersen MH, Isaacson RJ, Lindauer SJ. Accuracy of digital and rapid prototyped models. Paper presented at: IADR 80th General Session; March 8, 2002, San Diego, CA.
4. Zilberman O, Huggare JAV, Parikakis KA. Evaluation of the validity of tooth size and arch width measurements using conventional and three-dimensional virtual orthodontic models. Angle Orthod. 2003;73:301-306.
5. Tomassetti JJ, Taloumis LJ, Denny JM, Fischer JR. A comparison of 3 computerized Bolton tooth-size analyses with a commonly used method. Angle Orthod. 2001;71:351-357.
6. Geodigm-e model™ USA. Available at: www.Dentalemodels.com. October 2002.
7. Ribarevski R, Vig P, Vig KD, Weyant R, O'Brien K. Consistency of orthodontic extraction decisions. Eur J Orthod. 1996;18(1):77-80.
8. Marcel T. Our digital model experience: a six-month OrthoCad user report. Practice Management Diary. PCSO Bull. 2001;73:1-4.