Comparison of Conventional and Digital Impression Methods for Measuring Mesiodistal Teeth Dimensions: An Analytical Cross-sectional Study
Introduction: We aim to determine and compare the correlation between conventional and digital impression methods for measuring mesiodistal teeth dimensions. Methods: This cross-sectional analytical study was conducted on a total of 120 dental arch samples with less than 5 mm of tooth crowding, comp...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2024-04-01
|
| Series: | Dental Hypotheses |
| Online Access: | https://journals.lww.com/dhyp/fulltext/2024/15020/comparison_of_conventional_and_digital_impression.2.aspx |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1846172346719666176 |
|---|---|
| author | Lam Nguyen Le Khanh Phuong Vu Le |
| author_facet | Lam Nguyen Le Khanh Phuong Vu Le |
| author_sort | Lam Nguyen Le |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Introduction: We aim to determine and compare the correlation between conventional and digital impression methods for measuring mesiodistal teeth dimensions. Methods: This cross-sectional analytical study was conducted on a total of 120 dental arch samples with less than 5 mm of tooth crowding, complete teeth on the dental arch, no missing teeth, and no fillings on the mesial or distal sides at Can Tho University of Medicine and Pharmacy. Conventional (extra-fast alginate) and digital impressions using a 3D intraoral scanner (CEREC Primescan) were taken from all participants, and the dimensions of the mesiodistal teeth were measured. Using R software, Pearson’s correlation coefficients were used to analyze the correlation between conventional and digital impression methods. Result: The pooled correlation for the maxilla was 0.8062 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.7751–0.8334] (very strong positive correlation); for the mandibular, it was 0.7645 (95% CI: 0.7165–0.8054) (strong positive correlation), and for both jaws was 0.7863 (95% CI: 0.7581–0.8115) (strong positive correlation). Conclusion: In the Vietnamese population measurement of mesiodistal tooth width using a digital dental scanner can be used instead of conventional plaster models. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-dd964150af7c42ce809cdbb455841c11 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2155-8213 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-04-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Dental Hypotheses |
| spelling | doaj-art-dd964150af7c42ce809cdbb455841c112024-11-10T12:00:05ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsDental Hypotheses2155-82132024-04-01152222410.4103/denthyp.denthyp_12_24Comparison of Conventional and Digital Impression Methods for Measuring Mesiodistal Teeth Dimensions: An Analytical Cross-sectional StudyLam Nguyen Le Khanh Phuong Vu LeIntroduction: We aim to determine and compare the correlation between conventional and digital impression methods for measuring mesiodistal teeth dimensions. Methods: This cross-sectional analytical study was conducted on a total of 120 dental arch samples with less than 5 mm of tooth crowding, complete teeth on the dental arch, no missing teeth, and no fillings on the mesial or distal sides at Can Tho University of Medicine and Pharmacy. Conventional (extra-fast alginate) and digital impressions using a 3D intraoral scanner (CEREC Primescan) were taken from all participants, and the dimensions of the mesiodistal teeth were measured. Using R software, Pearson’s correlation coefficients were used to analyze the correlation between conventional and digital impression methods. Result: The pooled correlation for the maxilla was 0.8062 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.7751–0.8334] (very strong positive correlation); for the mandibular, it was 0.7645 (95% CI: 0.7165–0.8054) (strong positive correlation), and for both jaws was 0.7863 (95% CI: 0.7581–0.8115) (strong positive correlation). Conclusion: In the Vietnamese population measurement of mesiodistal tooth width using a digital dental scanner can be used instead of conventional plaster models.https://journals.lww.com/dhyp/fulltext/2024/15020/comparison_of_conventional_and_digital_impression.2.aspx |
| spellingShingle | Lam Nguyen Le Khanh Phuong Vu Le Comparison of Conventional and Digital Impression Methods for Measuring Mesiodistal Teeth Dimensions: An Analytical Cross-sectional Study Dental Hypotheses |
| title | Comparison of Conventional and Digital Impression Methods for Measuring Mesiodistal Teeth Dimensions: An Analytical Cross-sectional Study |
| title_full | Comparison of Conventional and Digital Impression Methods for Measuring Mesiodistal Teeth Dimensions: An Analytical Cross-sectional Study |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of Conventional and Digital Impression Methods for Measuring Mesiodistal Teeth Dimensions: An Analytical Cross-sectional Study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Conventional and Digital Impression Methods for Measuring Mesiodistal Teeth Dimensions: An Analytical Cross-sectional Study |
| title_short | Comparison of Conventional and Digital Impression Methods for Measuring Mesiodistal Teeth Dimensions: An Analytical Cross-sectional Study |
| title_sort | comparison of conventional and digital impression methods for measuring mesiodistal teeth dimensions an analytical cross sectional study |
| url | https://journals.lww.com/dhyp/fulltext/2024/15020/comparison_of_conventional_and_digital_impression.2.aspx |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT lamnguyenle comparisonofconventionalanddigitalimpressionmethodsformeasuringmesiodistalteethdimensionsananalyticalcrosssectionalstudy AT khanhphuongvule comparisonofconventionalanddigitalimpressionmethodsformeasuringmesiodistalteethdimensionsananalyticalcrosssectionalstudy |