A comparative study of digital and conventional occlusal indicators: accuracy and reliability of the T-Scan Novus, wax occlusogram, and articulating silk in clinical application

IF 5.5 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Journal of dentistry Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-15 DOI:10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105695
Karoline M. Reich , Valerie Tatzber , Astrid Skolka , Eva Piehslinger , Stefan Lettner , Michael Kundi , Benedikt Sagl
{"title":"A comparative study of digital and conventional occlusal indicators: accuracy and reliability of the T-Scan Novus, wax occlusogram, and articulating silk in clinical application","authors":"Karoline M. Reich ,&nbsp;Valerie Tatzber ,&nbsp;Astrid Skolka ,&nbsp;Eva Piehslinger ,&nbsp;Stefan Lettner ,&nbsp;Michael Kundi ,&nbsp;Benedikt Sagl","doi":"10.1016/j.jdent.2025.105695","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Conventional occlusal analysis methods are increasingly challenged by digital technologies.</div><div>The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy and reliability of currently available conventional and digital occlusal indicators.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The number and distribution of occlusal contacts in habitual intercuspation (ICP) were recorded in 26 dentate adults using articulating silk (reference method), wax occlusogram, and the digital occlusal analysis system T-Scan Novus. Errors in the number and distribution of contact registration between the methods, as well as inter- and intra-observer agreement, were calculated per dental arch and tooth position.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The distribution of contacts within the dental arch followed a method-independent pattern. Per dental arch, articulating silk recorded 15.3±4.7 contacts, wax occlusogram 14.2±4.6, and the T-Scan 9.4±5.9. Agreement between the methods was highest for incisors and canines and lowest for premolars and molars. ICC for intra- and inter-observer agreement were considerably lower for wax occlusogram (0.36/0.34) than for the T-Scan (0.66/0.58).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Wax occlusogram recorded a higher number of occlusal contacts, whereas the T-Scan systematically registered fewer contacts but demonstrated greater intra- and inter-observer reliability. These differences suggest that conventional methods may provide a broader visualisation of contact distribution, while digital tools offer benefits in terms of reproducibility.</div></div><div><h3>Clinical Significance</h3><div>Articulating silk and wax occlusogram, register a summation of contacts including premature contacts enabling a more comprehensive occlusal diagnosis. In contrast, the T-Scan may be preferred when the identification of force distribution is the primary focus.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15585,"journal":{"name":"Journal of dentistry","volume":"156 ","pages":"Article 105695"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030057122500140X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

Conventional occlusal analysis methods are increasingly challenged by digital technologies.
The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy and reliability of currently available conventional and digital occlusal indicators.

Methods

The number and distribution of occlusal contacts in habitual intercuspation (ICP) were recorded in 26 dentate adults using articulating silk (reference method), wax occlusogram, and the digital occlusal analysis system T-Scan Novus. Errors in the number and distribution of contact registration between the methods, as well as inter- and intra-observer agreement, were calculated per dental arch and tooth position.

Results

The distribution of contacts within the dental arch followed a method-independent pattern. Per dental arch, articulating silk recorded 15.3±4.7 contacts, wax occlusogram 14.2±4.6, and the T-Scan 9.4±5.9. Agreement between the methods was highest for incisors and canines and lowest for premolars and molars. ICC for intra- and inter-observer agreement were considerably lower for wax occlusogram (0.36/0.34) than for the T-Scan (0.66/0.58).

Conclusions

Wax occlusogram recorded a higher number of occlusal contacts, whereas the T-Scan systematically registered fewer contacts but demonstrated greater intra- and inter-observer reliability. These differences suggest that conventional methods may provide a broader visualisation of contact distribution, while digital tools offer benefits in terms of reproducibility.

Clinical Significance

Articulating silk and wax occlusogram, register a summation of contacts including premature contacts enabling a more comprehensive occlusal diagnosis. In contrast, the T-Scan may be preferred when the identification of force distribution is the primary focus.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
数字与传统咬合指标的比较研究:T-Scan Novus、蜡样咬合图和咬合丝在临床应用中的准确性和可靠性。
目的:传统的咬合分析方法正日益受到数字技术的挑战。本研究的目的是比较目前可用的传统和数字咬合指标的准确性和可靠性。方法:采用咬合丝(参考法)、蜡样咬合图和数字咬合分析系统T-Scan Novus记录26例有齿成人习惯性间歇咬合(ICP)的咬合接触数和分布。每个牙弓和牙齿位置计算不同方法之间接触注册的数量和分布的误差,以及观察者之间和观察者内部的一致性。结果:牙弓内接触点的分布与方法无关。每牙弓关节丝有15.3±4.7次接触,牙蜡有14.2±4.6次接触,T-Scan有9.4±5.9次接触。门牙和犬齿的一致性最高,前磨牙和磨牙的一致性最低。蜡样咬合图(0.36/0.34)与t扫描(0.66/0.58)相比,观察者内部和观察者之间的一致性ICC明显较低。结论:蜡样咬合图记录了更多的咬合接触,而t -扫描系统地记录了更少的接触,但在观察者内部和观察者之间表现出更高的可靠性。这些差异表明,传统方法可以提供更广泛的接触分布可视化,而数字工具在再现性方面提供了好处。临床意义:清晰的丝蜡咬合图,记录接触者的总和,包括过早接触者,使咬合诊断更加全面。相反,当识别力分布是主要焦点时,T-Scan可能是首选。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of dentistry
Journal of dentistry 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
11.40%
发文量
349
审稿时长
35 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Dentistry has an open access mirror journal The Journal of Dentistry: X, sharing the same aims and scope, editorial team, submission system and rigorous peer review. The Journal of Dentistry is the leading international dental journal within the field of Restorative Dentistry. Placing an emphasis on publishing novel and high-quality research papers, the Journal aims to influence the practice of dentistry at clinician, research, industry and policy-maker level on an international basis. Topics covered include the management of dental disease, periodontology, endodontology, operative dentistry, fixed and removable prosthodontics, dental biomaterials science, long-term clinical trials including epidemiology and oral health, technology transfer of new scientific instrumentation or procedures, as well as clinically relevant oral biology and translational research. The Journal of Dentistry will publish original scientific research papers including short communications. It is also interested in publishing review articles and leaders in themed areas which will be linked to new scientific research. Conference proceedings are also welcome and expressions of interest should be communicated to the Editor.
期刊最新文献
Comparison of the accuracy and effectiveness of two robotic surgical techniques for zygomatic implant placement: an in vitro study Performance and repeatability of different models of Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (GPT) in generating removable partial denture framework designs. A comparative study Navigation implant surgery accuracy in different types of edentulism: A systematic review and meta-analysis Evaluation of surface and positional trueness of removable dies fabricated through fused filament fabrication Facial surface tracing approach to reduce the observation errors in 3D curvilinear landmark annotations on cone-beam computed tomography images
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1