Clinical use of a direct chairside oral scanner: An assessment of accuracy, time, and patient acceptance

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

Volumn 146, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 673-682

  Grünheid, Thorsten ^a   McCarthy, Shawn D ^b   Larson, Brent E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b Blaine Riverdale   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGINIC ACID; BIOMEDICAL AND DENTAL MATERIALS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANATOMY AND HISTOLOGY; CANINE TOOTH; CHEMISTRY; CHILD; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; DENTAL IMPRESSION; DENTAL PROCEDURE; DIMENSIONAL MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; INCISOR; JAW RELATION RECORD; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOLAR TOOTH; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREMOLAR TOOTH; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; TIME; TOOTH ARCH; TOOTH OCCLUSION; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ALGINATES; BICUSPID; CHILD; COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN; CUSPID; DENTAL ARCH; DENTAL IMPRESSION MATERIALS; DENTAL IMPRESSION TECHNIQUE; DENTAL MODELS; DENTAL OCCLUSION, CENTRIC; DIMENSIONAL MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; INCISOR; JAW RELATION RECORD; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOLAR; PATIENT SATISFACTION; TIME FACTORS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84908376791     PISSN: 08895406     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.07.023     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. M.J. Peluso, S.D. Josell, S.W. Levine, and B.J. Lorei Digital models: an introduction Semin Orthod 10 2004 226 238
2. B. Rheude, P.L. Sadowsky, A. Ferriera, and A. Jacobson An evaluation of the use of digital study models in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning Angle Orthod 75 2005 300 304
3. R.G. Keim, E.L. Gottlieb, A.H. Nelson, and D.S. Vogels III 2008 JCO study of orthodontic diagnosis and treatment procedures. Part 1: results and trends J Clin Orthod 42 2008 625 640
4. J. Farah, and L. Brown Integrating the 3M ESPE chairside oral scanner C.O.S. into daily clinical practice Dent Advisor 12 2009 1 4
5. A. Kurbad Impression-free production techniques Int J Comput Dent 14 2011 59 66
6. J.M. Stein Stand-alone scanning systems simplify intraoral digital impressioning Compend Contin Educ Dent 32 2011 58 59
7. R.G. Luthardt, R. Loos, and S. Quaas Accuracy of intraoral data acquisition in comparison to the conventional impression Int J Comput Dent 8 2005 283 294
8. J.B. Da Costa, F. Pelogia, B. Hagedorn, and J.L. Ferracane Evaluation of different methods of optical impression making on the marginal gap of onlays created with CEREC 3D Oper Dent 35 2010 324 329
9. A. Syrek, G. Reich, D. Ranftl, C. Klein, B. Cerny, and J. Brodesser Clinical evaluation of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions based on the principle of active wavefront sampling J Dent 38 2010 553 559
10. P.K. Brawek, S. Wolfart, L. Endres, A. Kirsten, and S. Reich The clinical accuracy of single crowns exclusively fabricated by digital workflow - the comparison of two systems Clin Oral Investig 17 2013 2119 2125
11. K.D. Rudd, R.M. Morrow, and R.R. Strunk Accurate alginate impressions J Prosthet Dent 22 1969 294 300
12. J.M. Bland, and D.G. Altman Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement Lancet 1 1986 307 310
13. J.M. Bland, and D.G. Altman Measuring agreement in method comparison studies Stat Methods Med Res 8 1999 135 160
14. J.F. Güth, C. Keul, M. Stimmelmayr, F. Beuer, and D. Edelhoff Accuracy of digital models obtained by direct and indirect data capturing Clin Oral Investig 17 2013 1201 1208
15. S. Vasudavan, S.R. Sullivan, and A. Sonis Comparison of intraoral 3D scanning and conventional impressions for fabrication of orthodontic retainers J Clin Orthod 44 2010 495 497
16. A. Ender, and A. Mehl Full arch scans: conventional versus digital impressions - an in vitro study Int J Comput Dent 14 2011 11 21
17. A.M. Cuperus, M.C. Harms, F.A. Rangel, E.M. Bronkhorst, J.G. Schols, and K.H. Breuning Dental models made with an intraoral scanner: a validation study Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 142 2012 308 313
18. D. Naidu, and T.J. Freer Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of the iOC intraoral scanner: a comparison of tooth widths and Bolton ratios Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 144 2013 304 310
19. M.G. Wiranto, W.P. Engelbrecht, H.E. Tutein Nolthenius, W.J. van der Meer, and Y. Ren 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 2013 140 147
20. J.S. Casko, J.L. Vaden, V.G. Kokich, J. Damone, R.D. James, and T.J. Cangialosi Objective grading system for dental casts and panoramic radiographs. American Board of Orthodontics Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 114 1998 589 599
21. M.W. Miller Syneresis in alginate impression materials Br Dent J 139 1975 425 430
22. J.M. Powers Replicating materials - Impression and casting R.L. Sakaguchi, J.M. Powers, Craig's restorative dental materials 13th ed 2012 Mosby St Louis
23. A. Ender, and A. Mehl Influence of scanning strategies on the accuracy of digital intraoral scanning systems Int J Comput Dent 16 2013 11 21