Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

¼öÁ¾ÀÇ ±¸°­ ½ºÄ³³Ê·Î äµæµÈ µðÁöÅÐ ÀλóÀÇ Á¤È®µµ¿¡ °üÇÑ ¿¬±¸ - ADA 132 Ç¥ÁØ Æò°¡¸ðÇüÀ» ÀÌ¿ë

Evaluation of Comparable Scanning Accuracy in Various Intraoral Scanner Systems : An Example of ADA 132 Standard Model

´ëÇÑÄ¡°úÀç·áÇÐȸÁö 2017³â 44±Ç 3È£ p.247 ~ 254
±èÀçÈ«, ¿À½ÂÇÑ, ¾ö¼öÇõ, ¹Îº´±¹,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
±èÀçÈ« ( Kim Jae-Hong ) - µ¿³²º¸°Ç´ëÇб³ Ä¡±â°ø°ú
¿À½ÂÇÑ ( Oh Seung-Han ) - ¿ø±¤´ëÇб³ Ä¡°ú´ëÇÐ Ä¡°ú»ýüÀç·áÇб³½Ç
¾ö¼öÇõ ( Um Soo-Hyuk ) - (ÁÖ)µð¿£ºêÀÌÁö¿¤ ºñÁî´Ï½º ¾î½´¾î·±½º ÄÚ¸®¾Æ
¹Îº´±¹ ( Min Byung-Kuk ) - µ¿³²º¸°Ç´ëÇÐ Ä¡±â°ø°ú

Abstract

º» ¿¬±¸´Â ±¸°­ ½ºÄ³³ÊÀÇ Á¤È®µµ ¹× Á¤¹Ðµµ¸¦ Æò°¡Çϱâ À§ÇÑ ¿¬±¸·Î¼­ ´Ù¾çÇÑ ±¸°­ ½ºÄ³³Ê¸¦ ºñ±³Çϱâ À§ÇÏ¿© ÃøÁ¤±âÁØÀÌ µÉ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ADA 132 Ç¥ÁØÀÇ Æò°¡¸ðµ¨À» ±¸°­ ½ºÄ³³ÊÀÇ ºñ±³Æò°¡ ¸ðÇüÀ¸·Î ¼±Á¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. Æò°¡ÇÑ ±¸°­ ½ºÄ³³Ê·Î´Â CS3500, Trios, Omnicam ¹× BluecamÀ» »ç¿ëÇÏ¿´°í, »ó´ëÀûÀÎ ºñ±³¸¦ À§ÇÏ¿© Ä¡°ú¿ë Ceramill Map 400¸ðµ¨ ½ºÄ³³Ê¸¦ ¼±Á¤ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ½ºÄµ µÈ µ¥ÀÌÅÍ´Â 3Â÷¿ø CAD ¼ÒÇÁÆ®¿þ¾î(Geomagic wrap; 1 ¥ìm)·Î Æò°¡ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖµµ·Ï ÆÄÀϺ¯È¯(È®ÀåÀÚ STL file) ÇÏ¿´°í, Á¤È®µµ ¹× Á¤¹Ðµµ ±×¸®°í Áøµµ¸¦ Æò°¡Çϱâ À§ÇÏ¿© ´Ù¾çÇÑ Æò°¡ ¸ðµ¨µéÀÇ ³ôÀÌ, °¢µµ, °Å¸® µîÀ» Æò°¡Ç׸ñÀ¸·Î ¼±Á¤ÇÏ°í °¢°¢ 30¹ø¾¿ ¹Ýº¹ ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿© Æò°¡ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ, ÃøÁ¤ÇÑ Æò°¡Ç׸ñÀÇ Âü°ª(true value)´Â 3Â÷¿ø ÁÂÇ¥ÃøÁ¤±â (coordinate measuring machine)·Î ÃøÁ¤ÇÏ¿© ºñ±³ Æò°¡ÇÏ¿´´Ù. 4 °¡Áö ¸ðÇü¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ±¸°­ ½ºÄ³³Ê¿Í ¸ðµ¨ ½ºÄ³³Ê·Î äµæÇÑ µ¥ÀÌÅ͸¦ ºñ±³ Æò°¡ÇÑ °á°ú, ±¸°­ ½ºÄ³³Ê °£ÀÇ À¯ÀÇÇÑ Â÷ÀÌ´Â ¾ø¾ú´Ù(p>0.05). ±¸°­ ½ºÄ³³Êº¸´Ù´Â ¸ðµ¨ ½ºÄ³³ÊÀÇ Á¤È®µµ ¹× Á¤¹Ðµµ°¡ ³ôÀº °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µÁö¸¸, ±¸°­ ½ºÄ³³Ê°£ÀÇ ´«¿¡ ¶ç´Â Â÷ÀÌ´Â ¾ø¾úÀ¸¸ç, ƯÈ÷ Omnicam °ú CS3500ÀÇ Á¤È®µµ ³ôÀº °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. º» ¿¬±¸¸¦ ÅëÇÏ¿© ¼±Á¤µÈ Æò°¡¸ðµ¨°ú Æò°¡¹æ¹ýÀº °øÁ¤ÇÏ°í Ç¥ÁØÈ­µÈ ¹æ¹ýÀ̸ç, °´°üÀûÀ¸·Î Ä¡°ú¿ë ½ºÄ³³Ê¸¦ Æò°¡ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ±âÁØÀÌ µÉ ¼ö ÀÖÀ» È¿°úÀûÀÎ ¹æ¹ýÀ¸·Î »ç·áµÈ´Ù.

This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy and precision of intraoral scanners. In order to compare various intraoral scanners, we selected the ADA 132 standard assessment model to provide a measurement standard for comparative evaluation of the scanners. The intraoral scanners assessed in this study were the CS3500, the Trios, the Omnicam, and the Bluecam; the Ceramill Map 400 dental model scanner was used for relative comparison. The scanned data was converted into an STL file to enable evaluation with 3D CAD software(Geomagic wrap; 1 ¥ìm). In order to assess accuracy, precision, and trueness, various heights, angles, and distances of the assessment model were selected for evaluation, and each item was measured 30 times. The true values of these assessment items were measured and compared using a 3D coordinate measuring machine. When the data for the 4 models obtained from the intraoral scanners and model scanner was compared, there were no great differences between the intraoral scanners, but the model scanner showed higher accuracy and precision than the intraoral scanners. The Omnicam and the CS3500 showed especially high accuracy and precision. The assessment model and methods selected in this study are thought to provide a fair and standardized method, that can be used effectively as a standard for the objective assessment of dental scanners.

Å°¿öµå

Á¤È®µµ; µðÁöÅÐ Àλó; ±¸°­ ½ºÄ³³Ê
Accuracy; Digital impression; Intraoral scanner

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

 

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

KCI