Efficiency and Accuracy of Three-Dimensional Models Versus Dental Casts: A Clinical Study

Abstract

Turkish Journal of Orthodontics (Turk J Orthod) is an international, scientific, open access periodical published in accordance with independent, unbiased, and double-blinded peer-review principles. The journal is the official publication of Turkish Orthodontic Society and it is published quarterly on March, June, September and December. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics publishes clinical and experimental studies on on all aspects of orthodontics including craniofacial development and growth, reviews on current topics, case reports, editorial comments and letters to the editor that are prepared in accordance with the ethical guidelines. The journal's publication language is English and the Editorial Board encourages submissions from international authors.

Comparison of the perception of orthodontists and general clinicians on the use of digital dental models in the city of Aracaju/Sergipe

“…Most orthodontists in this study said they knew about three-dimensional digital models (table 1). This can be justified by the fact that study models are essential for planning and diagnosis in orthodontics, and thus the types of existing models, such as digital ones, is a common topic [12,23]. However, even knowing and using digital models, orthodontists believe that plaster models are more accurate (table 1).…”

“…With technological advances and interest in three-dimensional and digital technology in the medical and dental areas, digital models have been developed with characteristics that eschew the difficulties encountered with conventional models [11]. The advantages include reduced time for analysis, the possibility of sharing information with other professionals over the internet [2,12], more efficient storage and recovery, greater diagnostic versatility, superior durability, and shorter processing time [13].…”

3D Scanners in Orthodontics—Current Knowledge and Future Perspectives—A Systematic Review

“…According to the Jadad scale for RCT, the authors evaluated the qualities of all four clinical trials included in the qualitative synthesis, based on five questions that analyze the randomization process, the experimental blinding and the appropriate time of follow-up. In the evaluation of the quality of RCTs, the total score of three studies was equal to 5, indicating high-quality studies [17,19,26]; while one scored 3, indicating a low-quality study [15]. Blinding is present in three RCT studies (Yilmaz et al [26] Nalaci et al [17] and Kim and Lagravére [19], Table 2).…”

“…In the evaluation of the quality of RCTs, the total score of three studies was equal to 5, indicating high-quality studies [17,19,26]; while one scored 3, indicating a low-quality study [15]. Blinding is present in three RCT studies (Yilmaz et al [26] Nalaci et al [17] and Kim and Lagravére [19], Table 2). The procedures of intraoral scanning are the same for both scanners.…”

“…In total there were 10 papers analyzing the accuracy of scanners and measurement on digital casts and their comparability to plaster models and measurements on them [19,22,23,26,30], to models processed by high-efficiency industrial scanners [21,27], evaluation of accuracy of one scanning device in comparison to another [15,20,22,27,28]. All authors underlined that the accuracy of intraoral scans allowed them to replace classic dental models, as the quality of tissue mapping is the same or better than in the classical method [20,23,26,27]. Interestingly, there were no significant differences in the mapping of the oral cavity between the direct and indirect technique, which eliminates the necessity of casting plaster models [21,24].…”