Logotipo do repositório
 

Publicação:
Evaluation of the influence of the impression technique, scanning direction and type of scanner on the accuracy of the final model

dc.contributor.authorViegas, Diogo Cabecinha
dc.contributor.authorMourão, João Tiago
dc.contributor.authorRoque, Joao Carlos
dc.contributor.authorRiquieri, Hilton
dc.contributor.authorFernandes, João
dc.contributor.authorArrobas, Fernando Vasconcelos [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorDiamantino, Pedro Jacy Santos [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorSaavedra, Guilherme de Siqueira Ferreira Anzaloni [UNESP]
dc.contributor.institutionLisbon University (FMDUL)
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-25T10:20:18Z
dc.date.available2021-06-25T10:20:18Z
dc.date.issued2021-01-01
dc.description.abstractObjective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the influence of the type of scanner and scanning direction on the accuracy of the final cast. Material and Methods: A partial master cast was used as a reference. A total of 128 scans were obtained and divided into two groups: the conventional method and the digital method. The digital group was divided into three groups: TRIOS 3, Omnicam and CS 3600. Each of these groups was subdivided according to the scanning direction, and each scan was overlaid on the digital reference cast to measure the trueness and precision of the procedures. Results: The overall precision values for the type of impression were 59.89 ± 13.08 μm for conventional and 13.42 ± 4.28 μm for digital; the values for trueness were 49.37 ± 19.13 μm for conventional and 53.53 ± 4.97 μm for digital; the scanning direction trueness values were 53.05 ± 4.36 μm for continuous and 54.03 ± 5.52 μm for segmented; and the precision values were 14.18 ± 4.67 μm for continuous and 12.67 ± 3.75 μm for segmented (p> 0.05). For the scanner type, the trueness values were 50.06 ± 2.65 μm for Trios 3, 57.45 ± 4.63 μm for Omnicam, and 52.57 ± 4.65 μm for Carestream; and those for precision were 11.7 ± 2.07 μm for Trios 3, 10.09 ± 2.24 μm for Omnicam, and 18.49 ± 2.42 μm for Carestream (p <0.05). Conclusions: The digital impression method is the most favorable method regarding precision; in terms of trueness, there are no differences between the types of impressions.en
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Fixed Prosthodontics and Oral Rehabilitation School of Dental Medicine Lisbon University (FMDUL)
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics Institute of Science and Technology São Paulo State University (Unesp)
dc.description.affiliationSchool of Dental Medicine Lisbon University (FMDUL)
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartment of Dental Materials and Prosthodontics Institute of Science and Technology São Paulo State University (Unesp)
dc.format.extent1-13
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.14295/bds.2021.v24i1.2179
dc.identifier.citationBrazilian Dental Science, v. 24, n. 1, p. 1-13, 2021.
dc.identifier.doi10.14295/bds.2021.v24i1.2179
dc.identifier.issn2178-6011
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85099303873
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/205730
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofBrazilian Dental Science
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectAccuracy
dc.subjectConventional impression
dc.subjectIntra oral impression
dc.subjectTrueness
dc.titleEvaluation of the influence of the impression technique, scanning direction and type of scanner on the accuracy of the final modelen
dc.titleAvaliação da influência da técnica de impressão, direção de digitalização e tipo de scanner na precisão do modelo finalpt
dc.typeArtigo
dspace.entity.typePublication

Arquivos

Coleções