三种不同面部扫描方式的体外准确性比较。

IF 1.1 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry Pub Date : 2023-08-31 DOI:10.1922/EJPRD_2495Michelinakis12
G Michelinakis, D Apostolakis, E Velidakis
{"title":"三种不同面部扫描方式的体外准确性比较。","authors":"G Michelinakis,&nbsp;D Apostolakis,&nbsp;E Velidakis","doi":"10.1922/EJPRD_2495Michelinakis12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A mannequin head was digitized using a reference scanner (Scan in a Box) to acquire the reference mesh. Subsequently it was scanned with a structured light scanner (Einscan Pro HD), a stereophotogrammetry scanner (RayFace100) and a laser scanner (Proface 3D Mid) to acquire test meshes.Resulting meshes were delineated in four horizontal areas and discrepancies calculated for the complete face and different facial partitions. One-way Anova and pairwise comparisons tests were used to compare trueness and precision between scanners across different areas. Significant differences were detected among scanners for complete face (F (3, 27) =776, P ⟨ 0.01)) and for delineated face areas (F (11, 99) =200.1, P ⟨ 0.01)). Einscan had significantly higher accuracy for the complete face (P⟨0.01) and significantly higher trueness for each facial partition compared to other scanners. RayFace had significantly higher trueness when scanning the middle part of face compared to other facial parts. Proface had significantly lower upper facial third trueness compared to other facial parts. All scanners had accuracy levels below the 2.00mm threshold. Facial scanning accuracy was influenced per scanner used. Scanning trueness per device was influenced by location of surface area. All scanners had accuracy levels within the acceptable accuracy threshold.</p>","PeriodicalId":45686,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","volume":"31 3","pages":"296-307"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An in vitro Comparison of Accuracy Between Three Different Face Scanning Modalities.\",\"authors\":\"G Michelinakis,&nbsp;D Apostolakis,&nbsp;E Velidakis\",\"doi\":\"10.1922/EJPRD_2495Michelinakis12\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A mannequin head was digitized using a reference scanner (Scan in a Box) to acquire the reference mesh. Subsequently it was scanned with a structured light scanner (Einscan Pro HD), a stereophotogrammetry scanner (RayFace100) and a laser scanner (Proface 3D Mid) to acquire test meshes.Resulting meshes were delineated in four horizontal areas and discrepancies calculated for the complete face and different facial partitions. One-way Anova and pairwise comparisons tests were used to compare trueness and precision between scanners across different areas. Significant differences were detected among scanners for complete face (F (3, 27) =776, P ⟨ 0.01)) and for delineated face areas (F (11, 99) =200.1, P ⟨ 0.01)). Einscan had significantly higher accuracy for the complete face (P⟨0.01) and significantly higher trueness for each facial partition compared to other scanners. RayFace had significantly higher trueness when scanning the middle part of face compared to other facial parts. Proface had significantly lower upper facial third trueness compared to other facial parts. All scanners had accuracy levels below the 2.00mm threshold. Facial scanning accuracy was influenced per scanner used. Scanning trueness per device was influenced by location of surface area. All scanners had accuracy levels within the acceptable accuracy threshold.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45686,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry\",\"volume\":\"31 3\",\"pages\":\"296-307\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1922/EJPRD_2495Michelinakis12\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1922/EJPRD_2495Michelinakis12","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

使用参考扫描仪(扫描在一个盒子),以获取参考网格人体模型的头部数字化。随后,使用结构光扫描仪(Einscan Pro HD)、立体摄影测量扫描仪(RayFace100)和激光扫描仪(Proface 3D Mid)对其进行扫描,以获取测试网格。在四个水平区域划分所得网格,并计算完整面部和不同面部分区的差异。使用单因素方差分析和两两比较检验来比较不同区域扫描仪之间的准确性和准确性。扫描器在完整面部(F (3,27) =776, P⟨0.01)和划定的面部区域(F (11,99) =200.1, P⟨0.01)之间检测到显着差异。与其他扫描仪相比,Einscan对整个面部的准确率显著提高(P⟨0.01),对每个面部分区的准确率也显著提高。RayFace在扫描面部中部时的准确率明显高于其他面部部位。与其他面部部位相比,面部表面的上三分真度明显较低。所有扫描仪的精度水平都低于2.00mm阈值。面部扫描的准确性受到每台扫描仪的影响。每个设备的扫描正确率受到表面区域位置的影响。所有扫描仪的精度水平都在可接受的精度阈值之内。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
An in vitro Comparison of Accuracy Between Three Different Face Scanning Modalities.

A mannequin head was digitized using a reference scanner (Scan in a Box) to acquire the reference mesh. Subsequently it was scanned with a structured light scanner (Einscan Pro HD), a stereophotogrammetry scanner (RayFace100) and a laser scanner (Proface 3D Mid) to acquire test meshes.Resulting meshes were delineated in four horizontal areas and discrepancies calculated for the complete face and different facial partitions. One-way Anova and pairwise comparisons tests were used to compare trueness and precision between scanners across different areas. Significant differences were detected among scanners for complete face (F (3, 27) =776, P ⟨ 0.01)) and for delineated face areas (F (11, 99) =200.1, P ⟨ 0.01)). Einscan had significantly higher accuracy for the complete face (P⟨0.01) and significantly higher trueness for each facial partition compared to other scanners. RayFace had significantly higher trueness when scanning the middle part of face compared to other facial parts. Proface had significantly lower upper facial third trueness compared to other facial parts. All scanners had accuracy levels below the 2.00mm threshold. Facial scanning accuracy was influenced per scanner used. Scanning trueness per device was influenced by location of surface area. All scanners had accuracy levels within the acceptable accuracy threshold.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Prosthodontics and Restorative Dentistry is published quarterly and includes clinical and research articles in subjects such as prosthodontics, operative dentistry, implantology, endodontics, periodontics and dental materials.
期刊最新文献
Influence of Surface Roughness on the Adhesion of Hydroxyapatite Coatings to Titanium and Titanium Alloy Surfaces: A Systematic Review of in vitro Experimental Studies. Performance of Fiberglass Posts Versus Fiber- Reinforced Resin Composites in Endodontically Treated Anterior Teeth Without Ferrule: A Systematic Review. Assessment of Efficacy of Implant Screwdrivers' During Multiple Tightening/ Untightening Cycles. An in vitro Study. Hybrid Full-Arch Rehabilitation Using Conventional And Zygomatic Implants: A Short-Term Retrospective Analysis. Clinical Survival of Indirect, Posterior Fiber-Reinforced Composite Fixed Dental Prosthesis: Up to 15 Years of Prospective Clinical Follow Up.
×
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:481959085
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