Have a personal or library account? Click to login
The evidence supporting methods of tooth width measurement: Part II. Digital models and intra-oral scanners Cover

The evidence supporting methods of tooth width measurement: Part II. Digital models and intra-oral scanners

Open Access
|Aug 2023

References

  1. Fleming PS, Marinho V, Johal A. Orthodontic measurements on digital study models compared with plaster models: a systematic review. Orthod Craniofac Res 2011;14:1-16.
  2. Stevens DR, Flores-Mir C, Nebbe B, Raboud DW, Heo G, Major PW. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of plaster vs digital study models: comparison of peer assessment rating and Bolton analysis and their constituent measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;129:794-803.
  3. Naidu D, Scott J, Ong D, Ho CT. Validity, reliability and reproducibility of three methods used to measure tooth widths for Bolton analyses. Aust Orthod J 2009;25:97-103.
  4. 3M Unitek. Digital imaging solutions. URL: http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3M/en_US/orthodontics/Unitek Accessed Jul 4 2011.
  5. Orthoproof. Orthoproof Australasia: the digital future of orthodontics. URL: http://www.orthoproof.com.au/index.html.
  6. Quimby ML, Vig KW, Rashid RG, Firestone AR. The accuracy and reliability of measurements made on computer-based digital models. Angle Orthod 2004;74:298-303.
  7. Santoro M, Galkin S, Teredesai M, Nicolay OF, Cangialosi TJ. Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124:101-5.
  8. GeoDigm Corporation. Emodel: 3d digital dental models. URL: http://www.geodigmcorp.com/emodel_services/emodel_by_geodigm.html
  9. Tomassetti JJ, Taloumis LJ, Denny JM, Fischer JR, Jr. A comparison of 3 computerized Bolton tooth-size analyses with a commonly used method. Angle Orthod 2001;71:351-7.
  10. Zilberman O, Huggare JA, Parikakis KA. Evaluation of the validity of tooth size and arch width measurements using conventional and three-dimensional virtual orthodontic models. Angle Orthod 2003;73:301-6.
  11. Mullen SR, Martin CA, Ngan P, Gladwin M. Accuracy of space analysis with emodels and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:346-52.
  12. Horton HM, Miller JR, Gaillard PR, Larson BE. Technique comparison for efficient orthodontic tooth measurements using digital models. Angle Orthod 2010;80:254-61.
  13. Asquith J, McIntyre G. Dental arch relationships on three-dimensional digital study models and conventional plaster study models for patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2012;49:530-4.
  14. Leifert MF, Leifert MM, Efstratiadis SS, Cangialosi TJ. Comparison of space analysis evaluations with digital models and plaster dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:16.e1-4.
  15. Joffe L. OrthoCAD: digital models for a digital era. J Orthod 2004;31:344-7.
  16. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM. Contemporary orthodontics. 4th edn. St. Louis: Mosby: Elsevier 2007;195.
  17. Peluso MJ, Josell SD, Levine SW, Lorei BJ. Digital models: An introduction. Semin Orthod 2004;10:226-38.
  18. Cadent™. Open technology: a timeline of digital innovation. Open, 2010;1:6.
  19. Cadent™. iOC™ powered by iTero™: a digitally perfect orthodontic impression. URL: http://cadent.cnpg.com/video/flatfiles/1217/
  20. Radz G. Clinical impressions of digital impressions. Dental Economics 2009;99(3).
  21. Mitchem C. Why digital impressions? Accuracy and productivity. Dental Economics 2012;102(1).
  22. Cadent™. Cadent iOC powered by iTero. URL: http://www.cadentinc.com/ioc/ioc.html
  23. Jacobson C. Taking the headache out of impressions. Dentistry Today 2007;74-6.
  24. Naidu D, Freer T. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of the iOC intraoral scanner: a comparison of tooth widths and Bolton ratios. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144:304-10.
  25. ESPE M. Lava™ Chairside Oral Scanner C.O.S. URL: http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3M/en_US/LavaCOS/3MESPELavaCOS/
  26. Birnbaum N, Aaronson H, Stevens C, Cohen B. 3D digital scanners: a high-tech approach to more accurate dental impressions. Inside Dentistry 2009;5(4).
  27. Wiranto MG, Engelbrecht WP, Tutein Nolthenius HE, van der Meer WJ, Ren Y. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of linear measurements on digital models obtained from intraoral and cone-beam computed tomography scans of alginate impressions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;143:140-7.
  28. Pilsner D. Implementing digital impressions. Journal of Dental Technology 2009;26-31.
  29. Cuperus AM, Harms MC, Rangel FA, Bronkhorst EM, Schols JG, Breuning KH. Dental models made with an intraoral scanner: a validation study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012;142:308-13.
  30. Ormco. Lythos Digital Impression System. URL: http://ormco.com/aao/
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/aoj-2013-0019 | Journal eISSN: 2207-7480 | Journal ISSN: 2207-7472
Language: English
Page range: 164 - 169
Submitted on: Jun 1, 2013
Accepted on: Aug 1, 2013
Published on: Aug 1, 2023
Published by: Australian Society of Orthodontists Inc.
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2023 Devan Naidu, Terrence J. Freer, published by Australian Society of Orthodontists Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.