TY - JOUR
T1 - The effects of orthodontic brackets on the time and accuracy of digital impression taking
AU - Heo, Hyojin
AU - Kim, Minji
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).
PY - 2021/5/2
Y1 - 2021/5/2
N2 - Background: The aim of the study was to study how the presence or the type of the orthodontic brackets influence the time measurement and accuracy of impressions using a digital oral scanner. Methods: The same models were divided into the control group (the model without a bracket), MB group (the model with a metal bracket), and CB group (the model with a monocrystalline bracket). Subsequently, scanning was conducted five times for each model using the Trios Pod 2®. Simultaneously, the duration for taking the digital impression was measured. The degree of accuracy was compared among the three groups. Results: As compared with the control group, scanning took 53.3 s longer in the MB group and 194.23 s longer in the CB group. In the canine and the first molar, the mean values of errors were compared between the left and right sides; in both the canine and the first molar, errors between the control group and the CB group were the greatest. Conclusions: Following a comparison of the duration and accuracy of the impressions between the three groups, our results suggest that its degree was the highest in the CB group where a monocrystalline bracket was attached.
AB - Background: The aim of the study was to study how the presence or the type of the orthodontic brackets influence the time measurement and accuracy of impressions using a digital oral scanner. Methods: The same models were divided into the control group (the model without a bracket), MB group (the model with a metal bracket), and CB group (the model with a monocrystalline bracket). Subsequently, scanning was conducted five times for each model using the Trios Pod 2®. Simultaneously, the duration for taking the digital impression was measured. The degree of accuracy was compared among the three groups. Results: As compared with the control group, scanning took 53.3 s longer in the MB group and 194.23 s longer in the CB group. In the canine and the first molar, the mean values of errors were compared between the left and right sides; in both the canine and the first molar, errors between the control group and the CB group were the greatest. Conclusions: Following a comparison of the duration and accuracy of the impressions between the three groups, our results suggest that its degree was the highest in the CB group where a monocrystalline bracket was attached.
KW - Digital impression
KW - Measuring time
KW - Orthodontic brackets
KW - Scanner accuracy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85105717233&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/ijerph18105282
DO - 10.3390/ijerph18105282
M3 - Article
C2 - 34065653
AN - SCOPUS:85105717233
SN - 1661-7827
VL - 18
JO - International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
JF - International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
IS - 10
M1 - 5282
ER -