Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 25, 2026
Accuracy in Dental Medicine, A New Way to Measure Trueness and Precision
Published on: April 29, 2014
Accuracy of various intraoral scanners in scanning post space preparation: An in vitro study
Abanoub M Abouseif1, Sanaa H Abdelkader2, Islam M Abdelraheem3
1Postgraduate Student, Division of Fixed Prosthodontics, Department of Conservative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt; Teaching Assistant of Fixed Prosthodontics, College of Dentistry, Arab Academy for Science and Technology and Maritime Transport (AASTMT), El-Alamein, Egypt.
Objectives:
This in vitro study aimed to evaluate the depth, trueness, and scanning time of intraoral scans for post spaces using four different intraoral scanners.
Methods:
A human maxillary canine was decoronated, endodontically treated, and prepared for a post space to a depth of 18 mm. Four intraoral scanners: Primescan (PS), Cerec Omnicam (OC), Medit i700 (MD), and Carestream 3700 (CS), were used to scan the post space (n = 15). A reference scan was obtained using a conventional polyvinyl siloxane impression, which was then scanned with a desktop scanner. All scans were converted to STL files and analyzed in a 3D inspection program to evaluate depth and trueness, measured by root mean square (RMS) calculations. Data analysis involved one-way ANOVA, followed by Bonferroni-adjusted pairwise comparisons.
Results:
PS achieved the greatest depth (18.07 mm), followed by MD (9.96 mm), CS (7.31 mm), and OC (7.13 mm), with significant differences observed among the scanners (P < 0.001). Significant differences in RMS values were also found (P < 0.001). The highest RMS value at a depth of 6.5 mm was recorded for OC (31.33 ± 3.44) and CS (30.93 ± 3.65), followed by PS (20.41 ± 3.65), with MD having the lowest RMS value (18.84 ± 3.22). At a depth of 9.5 mm, a significant difference was observed between PS and MD (P < 0.001), with PS showing the lowest RMS value (18.12 ± 2.20) compared to MD (25.80 ± 2.45). Regarding scanning time, PS was the fastest (33.67 s), followed by CS, MD, and OC.
Conclusions:
The PS scanner demonstrated the greatest scan depth, trueness, and the shortest scanning time. In contrast, OC and CS captured the least depth and trueness, limited to 7.1 and 7.3 mm, respectively.
Clinical Significance:
The PS scanner is recommended for scanning depths exceeding 10 mm, while the MD is suitable for depths less than 10 mm. OC and CS may be effective for scanning depths limited to 7 mm.
