•  
  •  
 

DOI

10.1016/j.jds.2023.09.009

First Page

466

Last Page

472

Abstract

Abstract Background/purpose The accuracy of a full-arch scan by using an intraoral scanner should be validated under clinical conditions. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of full-arch digital impressions in the maxilla and mandible using two intra oral scanners with three different scan segmental sequential ranges. Materials and methods A dental model with 28 teeth in their normal positions served as the reference. Sixty full-arch scans were performed using Trios 3 and Trios 4, employing scanning strategy O (manufacturer's original method), OH (segmental sequential ranges one half), and TQ (segmental sequential ranges third quarter). Trueness was evaluated by comparing digital impressions with a reference dataset using specialized software. One-way ANOVA and Tukey tests assessed differences between the groups. Results For Trios 3 on the maxilla, no significant difference was found among the groups of trueness; in the mandible, strategy O exhibited a significant difference ( P = 0.008) with the highest deviation. For Trios 4 on the maxilla, strategy TQ demonstrated the lowest deviation with a significant difference ( P = 0.006); in the mandible, no significant difference was found among the groups of trueness. Conclusion Strategy TQ exhibited the best trueness for Trios 3 and Trios 4, suggesting it may be preferred for higher accuracy. Clinicians should consider these findings when selecting scanning strategies and intraoral scanners for specific cases.

Download

Share

COinS