Influence of operator experience, scanner type, and scan size on 3D scans

Intraoral scanners (IOSs) have some inherent distortions caused by optical and/or software imperfections. However, how other factors such as operator experience, scan time, scanner type, and scan size influence scan accuracy is not clear. The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the truene...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of prosthetic dentistry 2021-02, Vol.125 (2), p.294-299
Main Authors: Resende, Caio César Dias, Barbosa, Tiago Augusto Quirino, Moura, Guilherme Faria, Tavares, Lucas do Nascimento, Rizzante, Fabio Antonio Piola, George, Furat M., Neves, Flávio Domingues das, Mendonça, Gustavo
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Computer-Aided Design
Dental Arch
Dental Impression Technique
Dental Models
Dentistry
Imaging, Three-Dimensional
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Intraoral scanners (IOSs) have some inherent distortions caused by optical and/or software imperfections. However, how other factors such as operator experience, scan time, scanner type, and scan size influence scan accuracy is not clear. The purpose of this in vitro study was to evaluate the trueness and precision of scans performed by 3 professionals with different levels of experience by using 2 IOSs. Three operators with low, medium, and high levels of experience scanned a master model 10 times by using 2 IOSs (CEREC Omnicam; Dentsply Sirona and TRIOS 3; 3Shape), resulting in 10 standard tessellation language files for each group (N=60). Each standard tessellation language file was divided into 2 areas (prepared teeth and complete arch). Precision was evaluated by comparing the 10 scans from each examiner for each system. Trueness was evaluated by comparing each scan file with a reference scan obtained from a laboratory scanner (D2000; 3Shape). A 3D analysis software program (Geomagic Control; 3D Systems) was used to perform all the comparisons and superimpositions. The 3-way ANOVA test followed by the Tukey HSD test were used to assess precision and trueness. The 2-way ANOVA followed by the Tukey HSD test was used to assess scan time. The Pearson correlation test was performed between scan time and trueness for both scanners. An additional correlation was performed between scan time and number of images, as well as between number of images and trueness for the TRIOS 3. Statistically significant influences of operator (P
ISSN:0022-3913
1097-6841
DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.12.011