Influence of age and scanning system on the learning curve of experienced and novel intraoral scanner operators: A multi-centric clinical trial

Clinical evaluation of removable partial dentures with digitally fabricated metal framework after 4 years of clinical service

This case report describes the clinical outcomes of three patients who received removable partial dentures with a completely digitally designed and manufactured metal framework. The initial intraoral impressions were prepared, and the resulting standard tessellation language files were sent to a dental laboratory, where the alloy framework was designed using inLab software and printed using a 3D printer or milled directly from a Co-Cr disc. The quality of fit of the framework was evaluated intraorally to confirm the laboratory design. The acrylic teeth were set, and the definitive partial dentures were delivered after the acrylic resin bases were processed. The follow-up time was 4 years. No complications or failures related to the components of the partial dentures were observed.

Influence of age, training, intraoral scanner, and software version on the scan accuracy of inexperienced operators

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of operator age on the scan accuracy (trueness and precision) of inexperienced operators when compared with experienced operators, and how training, intraoral scanner (IOS), and software version affect scan accuracy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty-four operators were sorted into groups: G1 (operators <25 years old, no experience), G2 (operators >40 years old, no experience), and G3 (experienced IOS operators). They conducted partial-arch scans before and after a 4-session training with two IOSs (Trios 3 and True Definition) and two software versions. These scans were compared with the reference scans obtained from conventional impressions and a laboratory scanner (IScan D103i) to evaluate trueness (mean root mean square values) and precision (standard deviation of root mean square values) with a software program (Geomagic Control X). Kruskal-Wallis and post-hoc Dunn's tests were used to evaluate the effect of age on the scan accuracy of inexperienced groups when compared with experienced operators, while the effect of training, IOS, and software version on scan accuracy was evaluated with Wilcoxon or Mann-Whitney U tests (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

Before training, G1 and G2 scans had similar accuracy (p ≥ 0.065). After training, G1 scans had higher accuracy when IOS data was pooled and had higher precision with TD (p ≤ 0.004). Training increased the scan accuracy (p < 0.001), while newer software increased the trueness of inexperienced operator scans (p = 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

Age affected the scan accuracy of inexperienced operators after training, indicating that extended training may be required for older operators. Training increased the scan accuracy, and newer software increased the trueness of inexperienced operator scans.

In vitro study of the accuracy and efficiency of wireless intraoral scanners at various battery levels

OBJECTIVES

To determine the trueness and precision of 2 wireless intraoral scanners (IOSs) under various battery levels, and assess scanning efficiency.

METHODS

A maxillary cast with 4 metal spheres attached was fabricated. Two wireless IOSs (TRIOS 3 and TRIOS 4) were evaluated under 3 battery levels (1-30%, 31-60%, and 61-100%; n = 30). Six horizontal distances and 1 vertical distance were measured between 4 spherical centers and 1 generated plane. The distance deviations were determined with a coordinate-measuring machine data set. Kruskal-Wallis and Levene tests were used to analyze trueness and precision. Scan time and the number of three-dimensional (3D) images captured were analyzed by using a 2-way analysis of variance.

RESULTS

In terms of trueness and precision, no significant differences were found at various battery levels over the majority of the measured distances. TRIOS 4 demonstrated better trueness than TRIOS 3 for cross-arch scan. The 61-100% battery level resulted in the shortest scan time and the least number of 3D images captured (p < 0.001). Scan time and number of 3D images captured were strongly correlated for TRIOS 3 (r = 0.66) and TRIOS 4 (r = 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in battery level had no impact on the trueness and precision of TRIOS 3 and TRIOS 4. High battery level IOSs resulted in faster scans and fewer 3D images captured with less storage space. TRIOS 4 scanned faster, captured fewer images, and demonstrated better trueness than TRIOS 3.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Although all battery levels of wireless IOSs provide comparable trueness and precision, a wireless IOS with a high battery level is more time efficient than one with a low battery level in complete-arch scan.

Comparison of the Time and Accuracy of Intraoral Scans Performed by Dentists, Nurses, Postgraduates, and Undergraduates

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the scanning time (ST) and accuracy of 10 repeated upper and lower dentition scans by four groups of operators with different professional backgrounds.

METHODS

There were a total of 32 participants, including dentists, nurses, postgraduates, and undergraduates (n=8). They received the same training about intraoral scanning and then performed 10 repeat scans on the plaster maxillary and mandibular dentition models in a manikin head, with the first five scans being the T1 phase and the last five scans being the T2 phase. Each ST was recorded. Trueness and precision were evaluated by root mean square (RMS) value gained from alignments of corresponding virtual models. For statistical analysis, the paired-sample t-tests, one-way ANOVA, and Pearson correlation tests were employed (α=0.05).

RESULTS

Limiting the comparison in scan phase and scan target the sequence of STs for the four groups was the same (p<0.05), by which undergraduates, postgraduates, nurses, and dentists were in descending order. Undergraduates gained the best precision, followed by postgraduates, dentists, and nurses, in both maxillary and mandibular scanning (p<0.05). Compared with corresponding items of the T1 phase, the trueness of the T2 phase was much higher (p<0.05), while the ST of the T2 phase was much shorter (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The operator's professional background affects the precision and scanning time but not the trueness. Most dental personnel have good access to the intraoral scanner. As the number of scans increased, the accuracy and scanning efficiency also improved.

Comparison of the learning curve of intraoral scanning with two different intraoral scanners based on scanning time

BACKGROUND

The appearance of intraoral scanners (IOSs) in dental offices was an important milestones for the digital innovations in dentistry. Knowing the learning curve for intraoral scanning is crucial, because it can serve as a guideline for clinicians before buying a new IOS. The aim of the present in vivo study was to determine the learning curve required by dental students for intraoral scanning with the 3Shape Trios 4 IOS and the CEREC Primescan IOS, based on scanning time.

METHODS

A total of 20 dental students with no previous experience in intraoral scanning participated in the present study. 10 students scanned with Trios 4® IOS (TRI) and 10 students took digital impressions with Primescan® IOS (CER). Every student created 15 digital impressions from patients. Prior to taking the impressions, theoretical and practical education was provided. The total scanning time included the upper and lower arches as well as bite registration, for which average values were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed using the Stata package with a mixed-effects generalized least squares regression models.

RESULTS

The average total scanning times were the following: TRI - 205 s for the 1st impression, 133.6 s for the 15th, CER - 289.8 s for the 1st impression, 147 s for the 15th. The model-based estimate of the difference between the two in case of TRI was 57.5 s, and in CER was 144.2 s which is a highly significant improvement in both cases (P < 0.0001). The slope of the scanning time vs. learning phase curve gradually approached flatness, and maintained a plateau: TRI - from the 11th measurement and CER - from the 14th measurement onward.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the limitations of the present study, we found difference between the learning curve of scanner types which are operate various principle of imaging. In case of the TRI fewer digital impressions (11 repeating) were sufficient to reach the average scanning time of an experienced user than using CER (14 repeating).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The permission for this study was given by the University Ethics Committee of Semmelweis University (SE RKEB number: 184/2022).

Digital workflow in implant prosthodontics: The critical aspects for reliable accuracy

INTRODUCTION

This paper is a comprehensive treaty about the variables that influence the transfer of the position of an implant to the laboratory when using a digital workflow.

OBJECTIVE

The aim is to provide operators and manufacturers with a guide on how to improve certain aspects of the digital workflow specific to the fabrication of implant-supported restorations.

OVERVIEW

It addresses intraoral scanning issues and CAD software issues. In the former, the variables that play a part in the quality of the scan file are investigated: the implant scan body, the IOS and the operator. For the latter, instead, the focus is on those aspects that still today may create inaccuracies in the workflow and in the final product being fabricated: the identification of the specific implant placed in the patient and the generation of a virtual model with the representation of that implant platform correctly positioned in the three dimensions of space. Suggestions and recommendations are given to improve the control on the quality of the digital workflow's output.

CONCLUSION

In a digital workflow for the fabrication of an implant-supported restoration, the selection and use of the implant scan body, the use of an effective scan strategy and the appropriateness of the best fit function in the CAD software, that is, the procedure of superimposing the library of geometric shapes of the ISB linked to the implant with the shape acquired intraorally, are variables that can influence the positional precision of the FDP.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Fully understanding the importance of the information enclosed in the ISBs themselves can be crucial in the digital workflow. A proper ISB's selection, a correct scan of the ISB's shape and an accurate CAD superimposition of the ISB's library can lead the clinician to reduce the variables that affect the final result in daily practice.

An overview of three-dimensional imaging devices in dentistry

OBJECTIVE

To review four types of three-dimensional imaging devices: intraoral scanners, extraoral scanners, cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), and facial scanners, in terms of their development, technologies, advantages, disadvantages, accuracy, influencing factors, and applications in dentistry.

METHODS

PubMed (National Library of Medicine) and Google Scholar databases were searched. Additionally, the scanner manufacturers' websites were accessed to obtain relevant data. Four authors independently selected the articles, books, and websites. To exclude duplicates and scrutinize the data, they were uploaded to Mendeley Data. In total, 135 articles, two books, and 17 websites were included.

RESULTS

Research and clinical practice have shown that oral and facial scanners and CBCT can be used widely in various areas of dentistry with high accuracy.

CONCLUSION

Although further advancement of these devices is desirable, there is no doubt that digital technology represents the future of dentistry. Furthermore, the combined use of different devices may bring dentistry into a new era. These four devices will play a significant role in clinical utility with high accuracy. The combined use of these devices should be explored further.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The four devices will play a significant role in clinical use with high accuracy. The combined use of these devices should be explored further.

How Does the Use of an Intraoral Scanner Affect Muscle Fatigue? A Preliminary In Vivo Study

The purpose of this study was to evaluate muscle activation and fatigue in the operator during tooth preparation and intraoral scanning by simulating these tasks in two types of dental unit chair systems (UCS). Six participants were recruited, and the above tasks were simulated. Electrodes were placed on the skin over five types of muscles (arm, neck, and shoulder muscles), and the maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) was measured. Electromyography (EMG) was assessed during the simulation, and EMG values were normalized using MVC. The root mean square (RMS) EMG (%MVC) and muscle fatigue (%) were calculated. Owing to a lack of normal distribution of the data, Mann−Whitney U test and Kruskal−Wallis H test were performed for statistical comparison, and Bonferroni adjustment was performed for multiple comparisons (α = 0.05). There was no significant difference in RMS EMG between the two types of dental UCS (intraoral scanning, p = 0.237; tooth preparation, p = 0.543). Moreover, the RMS EMG and muscle fatigue were not significantly different between the two tasks (p > 0.05). There was significant muscle fatigue after the intraoral scanner use was simulated thrice (p < 0.001). It is necessary to refrain from performing continuous intraoral scanning and tooth preparation and to take appropriate rest to reduce the incidence of musculoskeletal disorders in dentists in clinical settings.

Understanding the effect of scan spans on the accuracy of intraoral and desktop scanners

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to measure and compare the accuracy (trueness and precision) of intraoral scanners and desktop scanners when scanning different spans.

METHODS

Three plaster models representing different spans (full arch, half arch, and three teeth) were obtained from conventional silicone impressions of a maxillary typodont and used as the scanning objects. An industrial scanner (ATOS III Triple Scan) was used to scan the three plaster models to obtain reference digital models. The plaster models were then scanned using two intraoral scanners (Trios 3 and Primescan) and two desktop scanners (LS3 and D2000) to obtain test digital models. The reference and test models were imported into professional reverse engineering software for processing and analysis. The root mean square value indicated differences between the reference and test models. Two-way ANOVA and Bonferroni multiple comparison tests were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Two-way ANOVA tests revealed significant differences in trueness and precision for different scan spans (p < 0.001) and different scanners (p < 0.001), which indicates that the scanner types and scan spans affect the accuracy of the scanner. There was no significant difference in the accuracy of the D2000 at three different scan spans (trueness: 23.82 ± 0.22 µm, 21.53 ± 0.18 µm, and 21.02 ± 0.27 µm respectively; precision: 7.86 ± 0.83 µm, 7.87 ± 1.11 µm, and 7.82 ± 0.84 µm respectively). For the LS3 and the two intraoral scanners, the accuracy of the full arch scan (LS 3, trueness: 33.35 ± 0.47 µm, precision:15.36 ± 3.10 µm; Trios 3, trueness: 46.92 ± 9.23 µm, precision:20.79 ± 3.08 µm; Primescan, trueness: 28.73 ± 0.77 µm, precision:15.74 ± 2.45 µm) was significantly lower than that of the half arch (LS 3, trueness: 27.27 ± 0.43 µm, precision:5.62 ± 0.88 µm; trios 3, Trueness: 22.29 ± 1.50 µm, precision:14.12 ± 2.25 µm; Primescan, trueness: 18.91 ± 0.70 µm, precision:7.94 ± 1.09 µm) and three teeth scans (LS 3, trueness: 24.68 ± 0.36 µm, precision:5.29 ± 0.62 µm; Trios 3, trueness: 16.92 ± 0.78 µm, precision:11.95 ± 2.22 µm; Primescan, trueness: 15.79 ± 0.65 µm, precision:7.68 ± 0.62 µm).

CONCLUSIONS

The scan span affected the accuracy of the intraoral scanners, but not necessarily the accuracy of the desktop scanners.