Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Accuracy of Buccal Scan Procedures for the Registration of Habitual Intercuspation


Zimmermann, M; Ender, A; Attin, T; Mehl, A (2018). Accuracy of Buccal Scan Procedures for the Registration of Habitual Intercuspation. Operative Dentistry, 43(6):573-580.

Abstract

CLINICAL RELEVANCE:
Accurate reproduction of the jaw relationship is important in many fields of dentistry. Maximum intercuspation can be registered with digital buccal scan procedures implemented in the workflow of many intraoral scanning systems.
OBJECTIVE:
The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of buccal scan procedures with intraoral scanning devices for the registration of habitual intercuspation in vivo. The hypothesis was that there is no statistically significant difference for buccal scan procedures compared to registration methods with poured model casts.
METHODS AND MATERIALS:
Ten individuals (full dentition, no dental rehabilitations) were subjects for five different habitual intercuspation registration methods: (CI) poured model casts, manual hand registration, buccal scan with inEOS X5; (BC) intraoral scan, buccal scan with CEREC Bluecam; (OC4.2) intraoral scan, buccal scan with CEREC Omnicam software version 4.2; (OC4.5β) intraoral scan, buccal scan with CEREC Omnicam version 4.5β; and (TR) intraoral scan, buccal scan with Trios 3. Buccal scan was repeated three times. Analysis of rotation (Rot) and translation (Trans) parameters was performed with difference analysis software (OraCheck). Statistical analysis was performed with one-way analysis of variance and the post hoc Scheffé test ( p<0.05).
RESULTS:
Statistical analysis showed no significant ( p>0.05) differences in terms of translation between groups CI_Trans (98.74±112.01 μm), BC_Trans (84.12±64.95 μm), OC4.2_Trans (60.70±35.08 μm), OC4.5β_Trans (68.36±36.67 μm), and TR_Trans (66.60±64.39 μm). For rotation, there were no significant differences ( p>0.05) for groups CI_Rot (0.23±0.25°), BC_Rot (0.73±0.52°), OC4.2_Rot (0.45±0.31°), OC4.5β_Rot (0.50±0.36°), and TR_Rot (0.47±0.65°).
CONCLUSIONS:
Intraoral scanning devices allow the reproduction of the static relationship of the maxillary and mandibular teeth with the same accuracy as registration methods with poured model casts.

Abstract

CLINICAL RELEVANCE:
Accurate reproduction of the jaw relationship is important in many fields of dentistry. Maximum intercuspation can be registered with digital buccal scan procedures implemented in the workflow of many intraoral scanning systems.
OBJECTIVE:
The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of buccal scan procedures with intraoral scanning devices for the registration of habitual intercuspation in vivo. The hypothesis was that there is no statistically significant difference for buccal scan procedures compared to registration methods with poured model casts.
METHODS AND MATERIALS:
Ten individuals (full dentition, no dental rehabilitations) were subjects for five different habitual intercuspation registration methods: (CI) poured model casts, manual hand registration, buccal scan with inEOS X5; (BC) intraoral scan, buccal scan with CEREC Bluecam; (OC4.2) intraoral scan, buccal scan with CEREC Omnicam software version 4.2; (OC4.5β) intraoral scan, buccal scan with CEREC Omnicam version 4.5β; and (TR) intraoral scan, buccal scan with Trios 3. Buccal scan was repeated three times. Analysis of rotation (Rot) and translation (Trans) parameters was performed with difference analysis software (OraCheck). Statistical analysis was performed with one-way analysis of variance and the post hoc Scheffé test ( p<0.05).
RESULTS:
Statistical analysis showed no significant ( p>0.05) differences in terms of translation between groups CI_Trans (98.74±112.01 μm), BC_Trans (84.12±64.95 μm), OC4.2_Trans (60.70±35.08 μm), OC4.5β_Trans (68.36±36.67 μm), and TR_Trans (66.60±64.39 μm). For rotation, there were no significant differences ( p>0.05) for groups CI_Rot (0.23±0.25°), BC_Rot (0.73±0.52°), OC4.2_Rot (0.45±0.31°), OC4.5β_Rot (0.50±0.36°), and TR_Rot (0.47±0.65°).
CONCLUSIONS:
Intraoral scanning devices allow the reproduction of the static relationship of the maxillary and mandibular teeth with the same accuracy as registration methods with poured model casts.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics
2 citations in Web of Science®
2 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

1 download since deposited on 06 Mar 2019
1 download since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic for Preventive Dentistry, Periodontology and Cariology
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Uncontrolled Keywords:General Dentistry
Language:English
Date:1 November 2018
Deposited On:06 Mar 2019 16:17
Last Modified:06 Mar 2019 16:17
Publisher:Academy of Operative Dentistry
ISSN:0361-7734
OA Status:Closed
Free access at:Publisher DOI. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.2341/17-272-c
PubMed ID:29630481

Download