Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie 4/2014

01-07-2014 | Original article

Comparison of orthodontic measurements on dental plaster casts and 3D scans

Authors: Dr. J. Radeke, C. von der Wense, B.G. Lapatki

Published in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie | Issue 4/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background and objectives

Over recent years, we have witnessed a growing trend in orthodontics toward the use of three-dimensional (3D) techniques for diagnostic purposes, treatment planning, and fabricating appliances. This study was undertaken to compare the traditional manual technique of using vernier calipers to take orthodontic measurements on plaster dental casts versus an all-digital measuring technique based on virtual 3D scans of casts. In this study, we focused on the quantitative agreement between and time requirements of both methods.

Materials and methods

Plaster casts obtained from the jaws of 55 fully dentate patients who had not previously undergone orthodontic treatment underwent 3D scanning using a white-light scanner (d-Station 3D; Breuckmann, Meersburg, Germany). Once the casts had been blinded by an independent individual, three examiners with different degrees of expertise in dentistry and orthodontics measured the mesiodistal widths of teeth 6–6 in each jaw. A randomized sequence was used when taking the measurements three times using OnyxCeph3TM analysis software (Image Instruments, Chemnitz, Germany) and a dental vernier caliper. Bland-Altman plots were used to illustrate the level of agreement between the two methods, standard deviations of repeated measurements were calculated to assess their reproducibility, and the Wilcoxon’s signed-rank test was employed to compare their time requirements.

Results

The Bland-Altman analysis of all single values revealed no statistically significant difference between the software-based and caliper-based measurements of mesiodistal tooth width. Assuming the presence of normal distribution, the limits of agreement disclosed a 95% probability for the software values to range between +0.499 and −0.545 mm of the same value measured with the caliper. The standard deviations of repeated measurements were 0.33 mm with the software and 0.21 mm with the caliper. The digital method required significantly less time (p<0.01); however, differences were observed to be associated with operator experience.

Conclusion

Inexperienced examiners, in particular, take measurements of mesiodistal tooth dimensions faster using a software-based method than when using a dental vernier caliper. Similar values were obtained with both methods.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Ayoub AF, Wray D, Moos KF et al (1997) A three-dimensional imaging system for archiving dental study casts: a preliminary report. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 12:79–84PubMed Ayoub AF, Wray D, Moos KF et al (1997) A three-dimensional imaging system for archiving dental study casts: a preliminary report. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 12:79–84PubMed
2.
go back to reference Bell A, Ayoub AF, Siebert P (2003) Assessment of the accuracy of a three-dimensional imaging system for archiving dental study models. J Orthod 30:219–223PubMedCrossRef Bell A, Ayoub AF, Siebert P (2003) Assessment of the accuracy of a three-dimensional imaging system for archiving dental study models. J Orthod 30:219–223PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Berkowitz S, Pruzansky S (1968) Stereophotogrammerty of serial casts of cleft palate. Angle Orthod 38:136–149PubMed Berkowitz S, Pruzansky S (1968) Stereophotogrammerty of serial casts of cleft palate. Angle Orthod 38:136–149PubMed
4.
go back to reference Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310PubMedCrossRef Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Boldt F, Weinzierl C, Hertrich K et al (2009) Comparison of the spatial landmark scatter of various 3D digitalization methods. J Orofac Orthop 70:247–263PubMedCrossRef Boldt F, Weinzierl C, Hertrich K et al (2009) Comparison of the spatial landmark scatter of various 3D digitalization methods. J Orofac Orthop 70:247–263PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Bootvong K, Liu Z, McGrath C et al (2010) Virtual model analysis as an alternative approach to plaster model analysis: reliability and validity. Eur J Orthod 32:589–595PubMedCrossRef Bootvong K, Liu Z, McGrath C et al (2010) Virtual model analysis as an alternative approach to plaster model analysis: reliability and validity. Eur J Orthod 32:589–595PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Costalos PA, Sarraf K, Cangialosi TJ et al (2005) Evaluation of the accuracy of digital model analysis for the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system for dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 128:624–629PubMedCrossRef Costalos PA, Sarraf K, Cangialosi TJ et al (2005) Evaluation of the accuracy of digital model analysis for the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system for dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 128:624–629PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Dirksen D, Diederichs S, Runte C et al (1999) Three-dimensional acquisition and visualization of dental arch features from optically digitized models. J Orofac Orthop 60:152–159PubMedCrossRef Dirksen D, Diederichs S, Runte C et al (1999) Three-dimensional acquisition and visualization of dental arch features from optically digitized models. J Orofac Orthop 60:152–159PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Goonewardene RW, Goonewardene MS, Razza JM et al (2008) Accuracy and validity of space analysis and irregularity index measurements using digital models. Aust Orthod J 24:83–90PubMed Goonewardene RW, Goonewardene MS, Razza JM et al (2008) Accuracy and validity of space analysis and irregularity index measurements using digital models. Aust Orthod J 24:83–90PubMed
11.
go back to reference Keating AP, Knox J, Bibb R et al (2008) A comparison of plaster, digital and reconstructed study model accuracy. J Orthod 35:191–201 (discussion 175)PubMedCrossRef Keating AP, Knox J, Bibb R et al (2008) A comparison of plaster, digital and reconstructed study model accuracy. J Orthod 35:191–201 (discussion 175)PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Kuroda T, Motohashi N, Tominaga R et al (1996) Three-dimensional dental cast analyzing system using laser scanning. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 110:365–369PubMedCrossRef Kuroda T, Motohashi N, Tominaga R et al (1996) Three-dimensional dental cast analyzing system using laser scanning. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 110:365–369PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Leifert MF, Leifert MM, Efstratiadis SS et al (2009) Comparison of space analysis evaluations with digital models and plaster dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 136:16 e11–e14 (discussion 16)PubMedCrossRef Leifert MF, Leifert MM, Efstratiadis SS et al (2009) Comparison of space analysis evaluations with digital models and plaster dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 136:16 e11–e14 (discussion 16)PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Martensson B, Ryden H (1992) The holodent system, a new technique for measurement and storage of dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 102:113–119PubMedCrossRef Martensson B, Ryden H (1992) The holodent system, a new technique for measurement and storage of dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 102:113–119PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Miras D, Sander F (1993) Die Genauigkeit von Hologrammen im Vergleich zu anderen Modellvermessungen. J Orofac Orthop 54:203–217 Miras D, Sander F (1993) Die Genauigkeit von Hologrammen im Vergleich zu anderen Modellvermessungen. J Orofac Orthop 54:203–217
16.
go back to reference Motohashi N, Kuroda T (1999) A 3D computer-aided design system applied to diagnosis and treatment planning in orthodontics and orthognathic surgery. Eur J Orthod 21:263–274PubMedCrossRef Motohashi N, Kuroda T (1999) A 3D computer-aided design system applied to diagnosis and treatment planning in orthodontics and orthognathic surgery. Eur J Orthod 21:263–274PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Naidu D, Scott J, Ong D et al (2009) Validity, reliability and reproducibility of three methods used to measure tooth widths for bolton analyses. Aust Orthod J 25:97–103PubMed Naidu D, Scott J, Ong D et al (2009) Validity, reliability and reproducibility of three methods used to measure tooth widths for bolton analyses. Aust Orthod J 25:97–103PubMed
18.
go back to reference Okunami TR, Kusnoto B, BeGole E et al (2007) Assessing the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system: digital vs plaster dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 131:51–56PubMedCrossRef Okunami TR, Kusnoto B, BeGole E et al (2007) Assessing the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system: digital vs plaster dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 131:51–56PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Redlich M, Weinstock T, Abed Y et al (2008) A new system for scanning, measuring and analyzing dental casts based on a 3D holographic sensor. Orthod Craniofac Res 11:90–95PubMedCrossRef Redlich M, Weinstock T, Abed Y et al (2008) A new system for scanning, measuring and analyzing dental casts based on a 3D holographic sensor. Orthod Craniofac Res 11:90–95PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Regensburger K, Schenk HJ, Wiemann C (1980) Stereophotogrammetry and its use in stomatological research – a literature survey (author’s transl). Zahn Mund Kieferheilkd Zentralbl 68:786–800PubMed Regensburger K, Schenk HJ, Wiemann C (1980) Stereophotogrammetry and its use in stomatological research – a literature survey (author’s transl). Zahn Mund Kieferheilkd Zentralbl 68:786–800PubMed
21.
go back to reference Rosseto MC, Palma FM, Ferreira RI et al (2009) Comparative study of dental arch width in plaster models, photocopies and digitized images. Braz Oral Res 23:190–195PubMedCrossRef Rosseto MC, Palma FM, Ferreira RI et al (2009) Comparative study of dental arch width in plaster models, photocopies and digitized images. Braz Oral Res 23:190–195PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Ryden H, Bjelkhagen H, Martensson B (1982) Tooth position measurements on dental casts using holographic images. Am J Orthod 81:310–313PubMedCrossRef Ryden H, Bjelkhagen H, Martensson B (1982) Tooth position measurements on dental casts using holographic images. Am J Orthod 81:310–313PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Sander F, Tochtermann H (1991) Dreidimensionale computergestützte Modell- und Hologrammauswertung. J Orofac Orthop 52:218–229 Sander F, Tochtermann H (1991) Dreidimensionale computergestützte Modell- und Hologrammauswertung. J Orofac Orthop 52:218–229
24.
go back to reference Santoro M, Galkin S, Teredesai M et al (2003) Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 124:101–105PubMedCrossRef Santoro M, Galkin S, Teredesai M et al (2003) Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 124:101–105PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Schirmer UR, Wiltshire WA (1997) Manual and computer-aided space analysis: a comparative study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 112:676–680PubMedCrossRef Schirmer UR, Wiltshire WA (1997) Manual and computer-aided space analysis: a comparative study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 112:676–680PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Tomassetti JJ, Taloumis LJ, Denny JM et al (2001) A comparison of 3 computerized Bolton tooth-size analyses with a commonly used method. Angle Orthod 71(5):351–357PubMed Tomassetti JJ, Taloumis LJ, Denny JM et al (2001) A comparison of 3 computerized Bolton tooth-size analyses with a commonly used method. Angle Orthod 71(5):351–357PubMed
27.
go back to reference Linden FP van der, Boersma H, Zelders T et al (1972) Three-dimensional analysis of dental casts by means of the optocom. J Dent Res 51:1100PubMedCrossRef Linden FP van der, Boersma H, Zelders T et al (1972) Three-dimensional analysis of dental casts by means of the optocom. J Dent Res 51:1100PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Zilberman O, Huggare JA, Parikakis KA (2003) Evaluation of the validity of tooth size and arch width measurements using conventional and three-dimensional virtual orthodontic models. Angle Orthod 73:301–306PubMed Zilberman O, Huggare JA, Parikakis KA (2003) Evaluation of the validity of tooth size and arch width measurements using conventional and three-dimensional virtual orthodontic models. Angle Orthod 73:301–306PubMed
Metadata
Title
Comparison of orthodontic measurements on dental plaster casts and 3D scans
Authors
Dr. J. Radeke
C. von der Wense
B.G. Lapatki
Publication date
01-07-2014
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie / Issue 4/2014
Print ISSN: 1434-5293
Electronic ISSN: 1615-6714
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-014-0217-9

Other articles of this Issue 4/2014

Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie 4/2014 Go to the issue

Informationen

Mitteilungen