Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. Jul-Aug 2014;19(4):107-13.
doi: 10.1590/2176-9451.19.4.107-113.oar.

Tooth-size Discrepancy: A Comparison Between Manual and Digital Methods

Free PMC article
Comparative Study

Tooth-size Discrepancy: A Comparison Between Manual and Digital Methods

Gabriele Dória Cabral Correia et al. Dental Press J Orthod. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

Introduction: Technological advances in Dentistry have emerged primarily in the area of diagnostic tools. One example is the 3D scanner, which can transform plaster models into three-dimensional digital models.

Objective: This study aimed to assess the reliability of tooth size-arch length discrepancy analysis measurements performed on three-dimensional digital models, and compare these measurements with those obtained from plaster models.

Material and methods: To this end, plaster models of lower dental arches and their corresponding three-dimensional digital models acquired with a 3Shape R700T scanner were used. All of them had lower permanent dentition. Four different tooth size-arch length discrepancy calculations were performed on each model, two of which by manual methods using calipers and brass wire, and two by digital methods using linear measurements and parabolas.

Results: Data were statistically assessed using Friedman test and no statistically significant differences were found between the two methods (P > 0.05), except for values found by the linear digital method which revealed a slight, non-significant statistical difference.

Conclusions: Based on the results, it is reasonable to assert that any of these resources used by orthodontists to clinically assess tooth size-arch length discrepancy can be considered reliable.

Introdução: na Odontologia, os avanços tecnológicos vêm se manifestando, principalmente, em instrumentos de diagnóstico, como o desenvolvimento dos scanners 3D, capazes de transformar modelos de gesso em modelos digitais tridimensionais.

Objetivo: o objetivo da presente pesquisa foi avaliar a confiabilidade da análise da Discrepância de Modelo realizada em modelos digitais tridimensionais, comparando-a com a obtida em modelos de gesso.

Métodos: utilizou-se modelos de gesso das arcadas dentárias inferiores e seus correspondentes modelos digitais tridimensionais, adquiridos por meio do scanner 3Shape R700T. Foram realizados quatro diferentes cálculos da Discrepância de Modelo para cada modelo selecionado, dois desses por meio de métodos manuais, utilizando paquímetro e fio de latão, e dois por meio de métodos digitais, utilizando medições lineares e por meio da confecção de uma parábola.

Resultados: os dados obtidos foram avaliados estatisticamente por meio do teste de Friedman, e observou-se não haver diferença estatisticamente significativa entre os métodos utilizados (p > 0,05), exceto os valores obtidos pelo método digital linear, onde observou-se uma pequena diferença estatística, porém, não são valores considerados clinicamente significativos.

Conclusão: com base nos resultados, é possível afirmar que, quaisquer desses recursos que o ortodontista venha a utilizar em sua vida clínica para obtenção da Discrepância de Modelo, esses são considerados métodos confiáveis.

Keywords: Computer-assisted diagnosis; Dental models; Three-dimensional imaging.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Space Required - Measuring the mesiodistal width of second right premolar.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Space Available - Caliper positioned from the mesial surface of first right molar to the mesial surface of right canine.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Space Available - Caliper positioned from the mesial surface of right canine to the region between central incisors.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Measuring Space Available with brass wire.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Space Required - Measuring the mesiodistal width of second right premolar on the virtual model.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Space Available - Landmarks plotted from the mesial surface of first right molar to the mesial surface of right canine on the virtual model.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Space Available - Landmarks plotted from the mesial surface of right canine to the region of central incisors on the virtual model
Figure 8
Figure 8
Measuring Space Available on the virtual model with the aid of a parabola.
Figure 9
Figure 9
Box plot with median values of the four different methods used to obtain tooth size-arch length discrepancy.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 9 articles

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Quimby ML, Vig KW, Rashid RG, Firestone AR. The Accuracy and Reliability of Measurements Made on Computer-Based Digital Models. Angle Orthod. 2004;74(3):298–303. - PubMed
    1. Matsui RH, Ortolani CLF, Castilho JCMC, Costa C. Análise de modelos ortodônticos pelo método digitalizado. Rev Inst Ciênc Saúde. 2007;25(3):285–290.
    1. Oliveira DD, Ruellas ACO, Drummond MEL, Pantuzo MCG, Lanna AMQ. Confiabilidade do uso de modelos digitais tridimensionais como exame auxiliar ao diagnóstico ortodôntico: um estudo piloto. Rev Dental Press Ortod Ortop Facial. 2007;2(1):84–93.
    1. Redmond WR. Digital models: a new diagnostic tool. J Clin Orthod. 2001;35(6):386–387. - PubMed
    1. Zilberman O, Huggare JAV, Parikakis KA. Evaluation of the validity of tooth size and arch width measurements using conventional and three-dimensional virtual orthodontic models. Angle Orthod. 2003;73(3):301–306. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources

Feedback