Effects of Operator Experience and Scanning Distance on Intraoral Scanner Accuracy

Year 2024, Issue: 3, 36 - 44, 15.10.2024

Taygun Sezer , Aybüke Bahadır Sezer

https://doi.org/10.51122/neudentj.2024.113

Abstract

Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of operator experience and scanning distance on the accuracy of the intraoral scanner in terms of trueness and precision.
Material and Methods: Reference data were obtained by scanning a partially edentulous gypsum model with implant analogs in regions 15, 16, 26, and 27 using a desktop scanner. Two expert dentists, one experienced and one inexperienced, performed test scans using the Trios 5 scanner. All data were transferred to analysis software. The scan bodies in the test scans were superimposed with the reference scan bodies for trueness measurement using a best-fit algorithm, calculating the deviation between the datasets. Precision measurement involves aligning the test scan data with each other using the same method. The effect of operator experience and scanning distance on scanner accuracy was evaluated using independent-sample t-tests.
Results: Full-arch scans exhibited higher trueness and precision deviations than partial-arch scans. For partial-arch scans by the experienced operator, the mean trueness deviation was 7.45µm, compared to 55.56µm for full-arch scans (p<0.001). Inexperienced operator results were 7.60µm and 58.90µm, respectively (p<0.001). Operator experience had no significant effect on trueness. For partial-arch scans performed by the experienced operator, the mean precision deviation was 2.73µm, compared to 33.87µm for full-arch scans (p<0.001). Inexperienced operator results were 3.36µm and 39.79µm, respectively (p<0.001). Operator experience significantly affected precision in partial-arch scans (p=0.044) but not in full-arch scans (p=0.563).
Conclusion: Scanner accuracy decreased with increasing scanning distance. The effect of operator experience on scanner accuracy was insignificant.

Keywords

Intraoral scanner, experience, accuracy, trueness, precision

Operatör Tecrübesi ve Tarama Mesafesinin Ağız İçi Tarayıcı Hassasiyetine Etkisi

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, operatör tecrübesinin ve tarama mesafesinin ağız içi tarayıcı hassasiyetine etkisini doğruluk ve kesinlik açısından değerlendirmektir.
Gereç ve Yöntemler: 15, 16, 26 ve 27 numaralı bölgelerinde implant analoğu bulunan kısmi dişsiz alçı modelin masaüstü tarayıcı ile taranmasıyla referans veriler elde edildi. Test taramaları, ağız içi tarayıcı kullanma deneyimi olan ve olmayan iki uzman diş hekimi tarafından Trios 5 tarayıcı kullanılarak gerçekleştirildi. Bütün veriler analiz yazılımına aktarıldı. Doğruluk ölçümü için test taramalarındaki tarama gövdeleri referans tarama gövdeleriyle "best-fit" algoritması kullanılarak çakıştırıldı ve iki veri seti arasındaki sapma hesaplandı. Kesinlik ölçümü, aynı prosedür kullanılarak test tarama verilerinin birbiri ile çakıştırılması ile gerçekleştirildi. Operatör tecrübesi ve tarama mesafesinin tarayıcı hassasiyetine etkisi bağımsız-örnekler t-testi ile değerlendirildi.
Bulgular: Tam ark taramalar kısmi ark taramalardan daha fazla doğruluk ve kesinlik sapması gösterdi. Tecrübeli operatör tarafından gerçekleştirilen kısmi ark taramalarında ortalama doğruluk sapması 7,45µm iken tam ark taramalarında 55,56µm bulundu (p<0,001). Tecrübesiz operatör taramalarında bu değerler sırası ile 7,60µm ve 58,90µm idi (p<0,001). Operatör tecrübesinin doğruluk sapması üzerine etkisi anlamlı değildi. Tecrübeli operatör tarafından gerçekleştirilen kısmi ark taramalarında ortalama kesinlik sapması 2,73µm iken tam ark taramalarında 33,87µm bulundu (p<0,001). Tecrübesiz operatör taramalarında bu değerler sırası ile 3,36µm ve 39,79µm idi (p<0,001). Operatör tecrübesi, kısmi ark taramalarında hassasiyeti önemli ölçüde etkiledi (p=0,044), ancak tam ark taramalarında etkilemedi (p=0,563).
Sonuç: Tarama mesafesi arttıkça tarayıcı hassasiyeti azaldı. Operatör tecrübesinin tarayıcı hassasiyete etkisi anlamlı değildi.

Keywords

Ağız içi tarayıcı, tecrübe, hassasiyet, doğruluk, kesinlik

References

• Floriani F, Lopes GC, Cabrera A, Duarte W, Zoidis P, Oliveira D et al. Linear accuracy of intraoral scanners for full-arch impressions of implant-supported prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Dent. 2023;17:964-73.
• Ul Huqh M, Abdullah J, Farook T, Jamayet N, Marya A. A current update on the use of intraoral scanners in dentistry-a review of literature. Int J Clin Dent. 2022;15:503-19.
• Revilla‐León M, Lanis A, Yilmaz B, Kois JC, Gallucci GO. Intraoral digital implant scans: Parameters to improve accuracy. J Prosthodont. 2023;32:150-64.
• Zhang YJ, Shi JY, Qian SJ, Qiao SC, Lai HC. Accuracy of full-arch digital implant impressions taken using intraoral scanners and related variables: A systematic review. Int J Oral Implantol. 2021;14:157-79.
• Wulfman C, Naveau A, Rignon-Bret C. Digital scanning for complete-arch implant-supported restorations: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;124:161-7.
• Carneiro Pereira AL, Souza Curinga MR, Melo Segundo HV, da Fonte Porto Carreiro A. Factors that influence the accuracy of intraoral scanning of total edentulous arches rehabilitated with multiple implants: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2023;129:855-62.
• Ender A, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: A new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;109:121-8.
• Mangano FG, Hauschild U, Veronesi G, Imburgia M, Mangano C, Admakin O. Trueness and precision of 5 intraoral scanners in the impressions of single and multiple implants: A comparative in vitro study. BMC Oral Health. 2019;19:1-14.
• Miyoshi K, Tanaka S, Yokoyama S, Sanda M, Baba K. Effects of different types of intraoral scanners and scanning ranges on the precision of digital implant impressions in edentulous maxilla: An in vitro study. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020;31:74-83.
• Alpkılıç DŞ, Değer Sİ. In vitro comparison of the accuracy of conventional impression and four intraoral scanners in four different implant impression scenarios. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2022;37:39-48.
• Lyu M, Di P, Lin Y, Jiang X. Accuracy of impressions for multiple implants: A comparative study of digital and conventional techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 2022;128:1017-23.
• Gimenez-Gonzalez B, Hassan B, Ozcan M, Pradíes G. An in vitro study of factors influencing the performance of digital intraoral impressions operating on active wavefront sampling technology with multiple implants in the edentulous maxilla. J Prosthodont. 2017;26:650-5.
• Ciocca L, Meneghello R, Monaco C, Savio G, Scheda L, Gatto MR, et al. In vitro assessment of the accuracy of digital impressions prepared using a single system for full-arch restorations on implants. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2018;13:1097-108.
• Chochlidakis K, Papaspyridakos P, Tsigarida A, Romeo D, Chen YW, Natto Z, et al. Digital versus conventional full‐arch implant impressions: a prospective study on 16 edentulous maxillae. J Prosthodont. 2020;29:281-6.
• Canullo L, Colombo M, Menini M, Sorge P, Pesce P. Trueness of intraoral scanners considering operator experience and three different implant scenarios: a preliminary report. Int J Prosthodont. 2021;34:250-3.
• Resende CCD, Barbosa TAQ, Moura GF, do Nascimento Tavares L, Rizzante FAP, George FM, et al. Influence of operator experience, scanner type, and scan size on 3D scans. J Prosthet Dent. 2021;125:294-9.
• Chen Y, Zhai Z, Watanabe S, Nakano T, Ishigaki S. Understanding the effect of scan spans on the accuracy of intraoral and desktop scanners. J Dent. 2022;124:104220.
• Denneulin T, Rignon-Bret C, Ravalec G, Tapie L, Bouter D, Wulfman C. Accuracy of complete-arch implant digital scans: effect of scanning protocol, number of implants, and scan body splinting. Int J Prosthodont. 2023;36:219-27.
• Andriessen FS, Rijkens DR, Van Der Meer WJ, Wismeijer DW. Applicability and accuracy of an intraoral scanner for scanning multiple implants in edentulous mandibles: A pilot study. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;111:186-94.
• Giménez B, Özcan M, Martínez‐Rus F, Pradíes G. Accuracy of a digital impression system based on active wavefront sampling technology for implants considering operator experience, implant angulation, and depth. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015;17:e54-e64.
• Lim JH, Park JM, Kim M, Heo SJ, Myung JY. Comparison of digital intraoral scanner reproducibility and image trueness considering repetitive experience. J Prosthet Dent. 2018;119:225-32.
• Revell G, Simon B, Mennito A, Evans ZP, Renne W, Ludlow M, et al. Evaluation of complete-arch implant scanning with 5 different intraoral scanners in terms of trueness and operator experience. J Prosthet Dent. 2022;128:632-8.
• Giuliodori G, Rappelli G, Aquilanti L. Intraoral scans of full dental arches: an in vitro measurement study of the accuracy of different intraoral scanners. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20:4776.
• Li Z, Huang R, Wu X, Chen Z, Huang B, Chen Z. Effect of scan pattern on the accuracy of complete-arch digital implant impressions with two intraoral scanners. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2022;37:731-9.
• Revilla-León M, Subramanian SG, Att W, Dent M, Krishnamurthy VR. Analysis of different illuminance of the room lighting condition on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of an intraoral scanner. J Prosthodont. 2021;30:157-62.
• Huang R, Liu Y, Huang B, Zhang C, Chen Z, Li Z. Improved scanning accuracy with newly designed scan bodies: An in vitro study comparing digital versus conventional impression techniques for complete-arch implant rehabilitation. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020;31:625-33.
• Papaspyridakos P, Gallucci GO, Chen CJ, Hanssen S, Naert I, Vandenberghe B. Digital versus conventional implant impressions for edentulous patients: accuracy outcomes. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;27:465-72.
• Zhang YJ, Qiao SC, Qian SJ, Zhang CN, Shi JY, Lai HC. Influence of different factors on the accuracy of digital impressions of multiple implants: an in vitro study. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2021;36:442-9.
• Thanasrisuebwong P, Kulchotirat T, Anunmana C. Effects of inter-implant distance on the accuracy of intraoral scanner: An in vitro study. J Adv Prosthodont. 2021;13:107-16.
• Tan MY, Hui Xin Yee S, Wong KM, Tan YH, Tan KBC. Comparison of three-dimensional accuracy of digital and conventional implant impressions: effect of interimplant distance in an edentulous arch. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2019;34:366-80.