Reliability of light microscopy and a computer-assisted replica measurement technique for evaluating the fit of dental copings

J Appl Oral Sci. 2018 Feb 1:26:e20160590. doi: 10.1590/1678-7757-2016-0590.

Abstract

The aim of this in vitro study was to assess the reliability of two measurement systems for evaluating the marginal and internal fit of dental copings. Sixteen CAD/CAM titanium copings were produced for a prepared maxillary canine. To modify the CAD surface model using different parameters (data density; enlargement in different directions), varying fit was created. Five light-body silicone replicas representing the gap between the canine and the coping were made for each coping and for each measurement method: (1) light microscopy measurements (LMMs); and (2) computer-assisted measurements (CASMs) using an optical digitizing system. Two investigators independently measured the marginal and internal fit using both methods. The inter-rater reliability [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)] and agreement [Bland-Altman (bias) analyses]: mean of the differences (bias) between two measurements [the closer to zero the mean (bias) is, the higher the agreement between the two measurements] were calculated for several measurement points (marginal-distal, marginal-buccal, axial-buccal, incisal). For the LMM technique, one investigator repeated the measurements to determine repeatability (intra-rater reliability and agreement). For inter-rater reliability, the ICC was 0.848-0.998 for LMMs and 0.945-0.999 for CASMs, depending on the measurement point. Bland-Altman bias was -15.7 to 3.5 μm for LMMs and -3.0 to 1.9 μm for CASMs. For LMMs, the marginal-distal and marginal-buccal measurement points showed the lowest ICC (0.848/0.978) and the highest bias (-15.7 μm/-7.6 μm). With the intra-rater reliability and agreement (repeatability) for LMMs, the ICC was 0.970-0.998 and bias was -1.3 to 2.3 μm. LMMs showed lower interrater reliability and agreement at the marginal measurement points than CASMs, which indicates a more subjective influence with LMMs at these measurement points. The values, however, were still clinically acceptable. LMMs showed very high intra-rater reliability and agreement for all measurement points, indicating high repeatability.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Evaluation Study

MeSH terms

  • Computer-Aided Design*
  • Dental Marginal Adaptation / standards*
  • Dental Prosthesis Design / methods*
  • Microscopy / methods*
  • Models, Dental / standards*
  • Observer Variation
  • Reference Standards
  • Reference Values
  • Replica Techniques / methods*
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Titanium / chemistry

Substances

  • Titanium