IADR Abstract Archives
Digital Impression Accuracy of Different Scanning Parameters
Objectives: The advancement of intraoral scanners has allowed for more efficient workflow in the dental clinical setting. The use of intraoral scanners has been widely adapted in recent years with the 3Shape TRIOS® scanner proven to be one of the most accurate systems. However, limited data exist regarding the accuracy of digital impressions produced using various manufacturer settings. The purpose of this in-vitro study was to evaluate and compare the accuracy of digital impression at the preparation margin using different scanning resolutions.
Methods: An all-ceramic crown preparation of #30 was constructed in a typodont and a control scan (n=3) was created with a laboratory scanner. Digital impressions using three scan settings – high-resolution (HR), standard resolution (SR), and combined resolution (SHR) were compared (n=20). 3D inspection was performed to measure the discrepancy between TRIOS® and control scans along the preparation finish line. Scanning time and the number of images captured per scan were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed with one-way ANOVA, two-way repeated measures ANOVA, Pearson’s correlation, and Dunnett’s T3 test (a = 0.05).
Results: For discrepancy on the finish line, no significant differences were observed between group HR (31.5 ± 5.5 μm), group SHR (33.2 ± 3.7 μm), and group SR (33.6 ± 3.1 μm). Scanning time in group SR was on average 34.2 seconds less than group SHR and 75.1 seconds less than group HR. Although no significant differences in discrepancy were observed between scanning resolutions, significant differences in discrepancy were observed among tooth surfaces, with the distal surface showing the highest discrepancies.
Conclusions: The data showed significant difference in scan time and numbers of images captured between different scan resolution settings. While the scanning resolution setting was not a significant factor in accuracy on the preparation margin, there were significant differences in scanning accuracy among the tooth surfaces.
Methods: An all-ceramic crown preparation of #30 was constructed in a typodont and a control scan (n=3) was created with a laboratory scanner. Digital impressions using three scan settings – high-resolution (HR), standard resolution (SR), and combined resolution (SHR) were compared (n=20). 3D inspection was performed to measure the discrepancy between TRIOS® and control scans along the preparation finish line. Scanning time and the number of images captured per scan were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed with one-way ANOVA, two-way repeated measures ANOVA, Pearson’s correlation, and Dunnett’s T3 test (a = 0.05).
Results: For discrepancy on the finish line, no significant differences were observed between group HR (31.5 ± 5.5 μm), group SHR (33.2 ± 3.7 μm), and group SR (33.6 ± 3.1 μm). Scanning time in group SR was on average 34.2 seconds less than group SHR and 75.1 seconds less than group HR. Although no significant differences in discrepancy were observed between scanning resolutions, significant differences in discrepancy were observed among tooth surfaces, with the distal surface showing the highest discrepancies.
Conclusions: The data showed significant difference in scan time and numbers of images captured between different scan resolution settings. While the scanning resolution setting was not a significant factor in accuracy on the preparation margin, there were significant differences in scanning accuracy among the tooth surfaces.