Journal article

Publication year: 2020

Journal: Journal of Clinical Medicine

Volume number: 9

Issue number: 3

eISSN: 2077-0383

Open access status: Gold

DOI Link: https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9030688

Publisher: MDPI

Abstract: 
The aim of this clinical study was to update the available data in the literature regarding the transfer accuracy (trueness/precision) of four current intraoral scanners (IOS) equipped with the latest software versions and to compare these data with conventional impressions (CVI). A metallic reference aid served as a reference dataset. Four digital impressions (Trios3Cart, Trios3Pod, Trios4Pod, and Primescan) and one CVI were investigated in five patients. Scan data were analyzed using three-dimensional analysis software and conventional models using a coordinate measurement machine. The transfer accuracy between the reference aid and the impression methods were compared. Differences with p < 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. Overall, mean standard deviation (SD) transfer accuracy ranged from 24.6 +/- 17.7 mu m (CVI) to 204.5 +/- 182.1 mu m (Trios3Pod). The Primescan yielded the lowest deviation for digital impressions (33.8 +/- 31.5 mu m), followed by Trios4Pod (65.2 +/- 52.9 mu m), Trios3Cart (84.7 +/- 120.3 mu m), and Trios3Pod. Within the limitations of this study, current IOS equipped with the latest software versions demonstrated less deviation for short-span distances compared with the conventional impression technique. However, for long-span distances, the conventional impression technique provided the lowest deviation. Overall, currently available IOS systems demonstrated improvement regarding transfer accuracy of full-arch scans in patients.

Harvard Citation style: Schmidt, A., Klussmann, L., Woestmann, B. and Schlenz, M. (2020) Accuracy of Digital and Conventional Full-Arch Impressions in Patients: An Update, Journal of Clinical Medicine, 9(3), Article 688. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9030688

APA Citation style: Schmidt, A., Klussmann, L., Woestmann, B., & Schlenz, M. (2020). Accuracy of Digital and Conventional Full-Arch Impressions in Patients: An Update. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 9(3), Article 688. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9030688