Accuracy and precision of polyurethane dental arch models fabricated using a three-dimensional subtractive rapid prototyping method with an intraoral scanning technique

Abstract

ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and precision of polyurethane (PUT) dental arch models fabricated using a three-dimensional (3D) subtractive rapid prototyping (RP) method with an intraoral scanning technique by comparing linear measurements obtained from PUT models and conventional plaster models.MethodsTen plaster models were duplicated using a selected standard master model and conventional impression, and 10 PUT models were duplicated using the 3D subtractive RP technique with an oral scanner. Six linear measurements were evaluated in terms of x, y, and z-axes using a non-contact white light scanner. Accuracy was assessed using mean differences between two measurements, and precision was examined using four quantitative methods and the Bland-Altman graphical method. Repeatability was evaluated in terms of intra-examiner variability, and reproducibility was assessed in terms of inter-examiner and inter-method variability.ResultsThe mean difference between plaster models and PUT models ranged from 0.07 mm to 0.33 mm. Relative measurement errors ranged from 2.2% to 7.6% and intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.93 to 0.96, when comparing plaster models and PUT models. The Bland-Altman plot showed good agreement.ConclusionsThe accuracy and precision of PUT dental models for evaluating the performance of oral scanner and subtractive RP technology was acceptable. Because of the recent improvements in block material and computerized numeric control milling machines, the subtractive RP method may be a good choice for dental arch models.

Accuracy of Dental Replica Models Using Photopolymer Materials in Additive Manufacturing: In Vitro Three‐Dimensional Evaluation

“…Linear measurements are frequently used to measure the accuracy of dental replica models, but have limited number of measuring points . Furthermore, since the positions of measuring points on the surface affect the accuracy, the rough surface of AM models hinders the identification of reference markers on it . In this study, 3D analysis software was used to reduce this type of error by using multiple overlapping points and to increase the accuracy of measurement.…”

Evaluation of the accuracy and precision of four intraoral scanners with 70% reduced inlay and four-unit bridge models of international standard

“…In previous studies, natural tooth-shaped models manually prepared by the researcher or full-arch dentiforms were used to test the accuracy and precision of intraoral scanners 6,9,14,20,23,24) . Alongside the development of various types of intraoral scanners, multiple studies have been conducted on their accuracy.…”

A Comparative Study of the Accuracy of Dies Made from Digital Intraoral Scanning vs. Elastic Impressions: An In Vitro Study

“…With regard to the casts generated by CAI techniques, studies have examined both virtual and real casts. Virtual casts have been extensively studied in the orthodontic literature where storage of pre‐ and post‐treatment casts needed for treatment planning and case evaluation is imperative . Storage of these casts requires much space in a busy orthodontic practice.…”

“…A comparative analysis suggests that the dimensional accuracy of the casts was within one‐third of a millimeter. A comparison of RP with milling suggests that the former results in a more accurate cast for studies in which an actual cast was produced . Studies in the prosthodontic literature have reported trueness in the range of 30 to 50 μm for actual casts.…”