EVALUATION OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS FOR MEASURING DENTAL ARCH DIMENSIONS ON DIGITAL AND 3D-PRINTED MODELS
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the reliability and agreement between the two methods of dental arch dimension measurements. Methods: A descriptive study was conducted on 40 digital models and 40 3D-printed models (printed from March 2025 to January 2026), derived from the same intraoral scan data. Measurements on digital models were performed using Medit Ortho Simulation software and on 3D-printed models using a Mitutoyo digital caliper. The measured parameters included inter-canine width, inter-molar width, anterior arch length, and posterior arch length. Results: No statistically significant differences were observed between the two model types across all dimensions (p > 0.05), except for the lower anterior arch length. Pearson correlation analysis revealed a very strong linear correlation between the two methods (r > 0.977; p < 0.001). The ICC(2,1) > 0.9 (p < 0.001) indicated high agreement and reliability between the two methods. Bland-Altman analysis revealed a very small systematic error (0.02 - 0.19mm), with 95% limits of agreement (LoA) ranging from -0.91 to +1.28mm. Conclusion: Dental arch dimension measurements on digital models using software and on 3D-printed models using a digital caliper demonstrate high reliability and agreement. After 9 months of storage, both model types from the same scan data can be used interchangeably.
Keywords
Dental arch dimension, Agreement, 3D-printed model, Digital model
Article Details
References
2. Camardella LT, Breuning H, de Vasconcellos Vilella O. Accuracy and reproducibility of measurements on plaster models and digital models created using an intraoral scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017; 151(1):69-77.
3. Keating AP, Knox J, Bibb R, Zhurov AI. A comparison of plaster, digital, and printed dental models. J Orthod. 2008; 35(3):191-201.
4. Jaber ST, Hajeer MY, Alkhouli KW, Al-Shamak RM, Darwich KMA, Aljabban O, Alam MK, & Kara-Boulad JM. Evaluation of three-dimensional digital models formulated from direct intra-oral scanning of dental arches in comparison with extra-oral scanning of poured dental models in terms of dimensional accuracy and reliability. Cureus. 2024; 16(2):e54869.
5. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986; 1(8476):307-310.
6. Kanokpoonsin S, Peanchitlertkajorn S, Saengfai NN, Boonpratham S. A comparison of tooth size and arch dimensions among measurements taken intraorally with 3D-printed and digital models obtained from intraoral scans. J Clin Exp Dent. 2024 Aug 1; 16(8):e1012-e1020.
7. Serrano-Velasco D, Martín-Vacas A, Giovannini G, Paz-Cortés MM, Aragoneses JM. Accuracy analysis of digital models from intraoral scanners and 3D-printed casts in children and teenagers. Children. 2024; 11:1082.
8. Fleiss Joseph. The design and analysis of clinical experiments. 1986; 10.1002/9781118032923.ch6.
9. Camardella LT, Ongkosuwito EM, Breuning KH, Vilella OV. The influence of printing resolution on the accuracy of 3D-printed dental models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017; 151(4):746-753.
10. Grunheid T, et al. Accuracy, reproducibility, and efficiency of standard digital models and models derived from cone-beam computed tomography. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2014.