Reproducibility of dental alignment in digital and manual measurements taken on dental casts
Keywords:
Reproducibility of results, Model, Measurements.Abstract
Introduction: The incorporation of digital models offers the orthodontist an alternative to the plaster study models that are commonly used. These are a standard component of orthodontic records and are critical to diagnosis and treatment planning. It is important to inquire about the reliability of new technologies.
Objective: To evaluate the reproducibility of digital and manual measurements of dental alignment in initial models of orthodontic patients.
Methods: A diagnostic technology evaluation study was carried out with 80 plaster models that were digitized with the Ineos X5 Scanner. Once the plaster models and digital images of them were obtained, the researcher who obtained the best result in the inter and intra examiner calibration performed the dental alignment measurement. Manual measurements were taken with a digital caliper, and digital ones were taken in the Nemocast software. The analysis included the calculation of the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and the Bland and Altman limits of agreement. A value of p <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results: ICC values ranged between 0.643 and 0.874, more than half of the measurements obtained ICC values higher than 0.81, which was considered “almost perfect” reproducibility according to the interpretation suggested by Landis and Koch. Differences between -0.2 to -0.4 were averaged with narrow limits of agreement.
Conclusions: An "almost perfect" reproducibility was found and an average of the differences close to zero between manual and digital measurements.Downloads
References
Kravitz ND, Groth C, Jones PE, Graham JW, Redmond RW. Intraoral digital scanners. J Clin Orthod. 2014;48(6):337–47.
Brandão MM, Sobral MC, Vogel CJ. Reliability of Bolton analysis evaluation in tridimensional virtual models. Dental Press J Orthod. 2015;20(5):72–7
Wan Hassan WN, Othman SA, Chan CS, Ahmad R, Ali SNA, Abd Rohim A. Assessing agreement in measurements of orthodontic study models: Digital caliper on plaster models vs 3-dimensional software on models scanned by structured-light scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop [Internet]. 2016;150(5):886–95.
Dragstrem K, Galang-Boquiren MTS, Obrez A, Costa Viana MG, Grubb JE, Kusnoto B. Accuracy of digital American Board of Orthodontics Discrepancy Index measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2015;148(1):60–6.
Barreto MS, Faber J, Vogel CJ, Araujo TM. Reliability of digital orthodontic setups. Angle Orthod. 2016;86(2):255–9.
Soto-Álvarez C, Fonseca GM, Viciano J, Alemán I, Rojas-Torres J, Zúñiga MH, et al. Reliability, reproducibility and validity of the conventional buccolingual and mesiodistal measurements on 3D dental digital models obtained from intra-oral 3D scanner. Arch Oral Biol. 2020; 109:1-8
Claus D, Radeke J, Zint M, Vogel AB, Satravaha Y, Kilic F, et al. Generation of 3D digital models of the dental arches using optical scanning techniques. Semin Orthod 2018;24(4):416–29
Restrepo M, Castellanos L, Grhes-Porto B, Santos-Pinto A, Santos-Pinto L. Comparación de medidas dentales y transversales realizadas en modelos de yeso con calibrador digital, y en modelos digitales con el software o3d. Rev CES Odontol. 2015;28(2):59–68.
Brown GB, Currier GF, Kadioglu O, Kierl JP. Accuracy of 3-dimensional printed dental models reconstructed from digital intraoral impressions. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2018;154(5):733–9
Gül Amuk N, Karsli E, Kurt G. Comparison of dental measurements between conventional plaster models, digital models obtained by impression scanning and plaster model scanning. Int Orthod.2019;17(1):151–8
Landis J, Koch G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Int Biometric Soc. 1977;33(1):159–74.
Review S. Diagnostic accuracy and measurement sensitivity of digital models for orthodontic purposes: A systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2016;149(2):161–70.
Ferreira JB, Christovam IO, Alencar DS, DaMotta AFJ, Mattos CT, Cury-Saramago A. Accuracy and reproducibility of dental measurements on tomographic digital models: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Dentomaxillofacial Radiol. 2017;46(7):1–16.
Rajshekar M, Julian R, Williams A, Tennant M, Forrest A, Walsh LJ, et al. The reliability and validity of measurements of human dental casts made by an intra-oral 3D scanner, with conventional hand-held digital callipers as the comparison measure. Forensic Sci Int [Internet]. 2017; 278:198–204.
Cuperus AMR, Harms MC, Rangel FA, Bronkhorst EM, Schols JGJH, Breuning KH, et al. Dental models made with an intraoral scanner: A validation study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2012;142(3):308–13.
Grünheid T, Patel N, De Felippe NL, Wey A, Gaillard PR, Larson BE. Accuracy, reproducibility, and time efficiency of dental measurements using different technologies. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2014;145(2):157–64.
Sousa MVS, Vasconcelos EC, Janson G, Garib D, Pinzan A. Accuracy and reproducibility of 3-dimensional digital model measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2012;142(2):269–73.
Santoro M, Galkin S, Teredesai M, Nicolay OF, Cangialosi TJ. Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2003;124(1):101–5.
Shastry S, Hyun J. Evaluation of the use of digital study models in postgraduate orthodontic programs in the United States and Canada. Angle Orthod. 2014;84(1):12–4.
Mullen SR, Martin CA, Ngan P, Gladwin M. Accuracy of space analysis with emodels and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2007;132(3):346–52.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors retain all rights to their works, which they can reproduce and distribute as long as they cite the primary source of publication.
The Rev Cubana Estomatol is subject to the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) and follows the publication model of SciELO Publishing Schema (SciELO PS) for publication in XML format.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
- You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
- No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
Download PDF
