» Articles » PMID: 29851810

Difference Between Manual and Digital Measurements of Dental Arches of Orthodontic Patients

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the differences between the measurements performed manually to those obtained using a digital model scanner of patients with orthodontic treatment.A cross-sectional study was performed in a sample of 30 study models from patients with permanent dentition who attended a university clinic between January 2010 and December 2015. For the digital measurement, a Maestro 3D Ortho Studio scanner (Italy) was used and Mitutoyo electronic Vernier calipers (Kawasaki, Japan) were used for manual measurement. The outcome variables were the measurements for maxillary intercanine width, mandibular intercanine width, maxillary intermolar width, mandibular intermolar width, overjet, overbite, maxillary arch perimeter, mandibular arch perimeter, and palate height. The independent variables, besides age and sex, were a series of arc characteristics. The Student t test, paired Student t test, and Pearson correlation in SPSS version 19 were used for the analysis.Of the models, 60% were from women. Two of nine measurements for pre-treatment and 6 of 9 measurements for post-treatment showed a difference. The variables that were different between the manual and digital measurements in the pre-treatment were maxillary intermolar width and palate height (P < .05). Post-treatment, differences were found in mandibular intercanine width, palate height, overjet, overbite, and maxillary and mandibular arch perimeter (P < .05).The models measured manually and digitally showed certain similarities for both vertical and transverse measurements. There are many advantages offered to the orthodontist, such as easy storage; savings in time and space; facilitating the reproducibility of information; and conferring the security of not deteriorating over time. Its main disadvantage is the cost.

Citing Articles

Do Hall Technique Crowns Affect Intra-arch Dimensions? A Split-mouth Quasi-experimental Non-randomized Feasibility Pilot Study.

AlRamzi B, AlHalabi M, Kowash M, Salami A, Khamis A, Ghoneima A Int J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2024; 17(6):673-682.

PMID: 39391144 PMC: 11463813. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-2858.


Extra-Oral Three-Dimensional (3D) Scanning Evaluation of Three Different Impression Materials-An In Vitro Study.

Bud E, Bocanet V, Muntean M, Vlasa A, Pacurar M, Zetu I Polymers (Basel). 2022; 14(17).

PMID: 36080753 PMC: 9459976. DOI: 10.3390/polym14173678.


Agreement of in vitro orthodontic measurements on dental plaster casts and digital models using Maestro 3D ortho studio software.

Rafiei E, Haerian A, Tehrani P, Shokrollahi M Clin Exp Dent Res. 2022; 8(5):1149-1157.

PMID: 35719020 PMC: 9562564. DOI: 10.1002/cre2.605.


Assessment of Growth Changes in the Width of Dental Arches Caused by Removable Appliances over a Period of 10 Months in Children with Malocclusion.

Palka J, Gawda J, Bys A, Zawadka M, Gawda P Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(6).

PMID: 35329130 PMC: 8950693. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19063442.


Evaluation of the Reliability, Reproducibility and Validity of Digital Orthodontic Measurements Based on Various Digital Models among Young Patients.

Park S, Byun S, Oh S, Lee H, Kim J, Yang B J Clin Med. 2020; 9(9).

PMID: 32846984 PMC: 7564383. DOI: 10.3390/jcm9092728.

References
1.
Whetten J, Williamson P, Heo G, Varnhagen C, Major P . Variations in orthodontic treatment planning decisions of Class II patients between virtual 3-dimensional models and traditional plaster study models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 130(4):485-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.02.022. View

2.
Rheude B, Sadowsky P, Ferriera A, Jacobson A . An evaluation of the use of digital study models in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. Angle Orthod. 2005; 75(3):300-4. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2005)75[300:AEOTUO]2.0.CO;2. View

3.
Fleming P, Marinho V, Johal A . Orthodontic measurements on digital study models compared with plaster models: a systematic review. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2011; 14(1):1-16. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-6343.2010.01503.x. View

4.
Rosseto M, Palma F, Ferreira R, Pinzan A, Vellini-Ferreira F . Comparative study of dental arch width in plaster models, photocopies and digitized images. Braz Oral Res. 2009; 23(2):190-5. DOI: 10.1590/s1806-83242009000200016. View

5.
Santoro M, Galkin S, Teredesai M, Nicolay O, Cangialosi T . Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 124(1):101-5. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(03)00152-5. View