Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 19, 2026
07:57
Accuracy in Dental Medicine, A New Way to Measure Trueness and Precision
Published on: April 29, 2014
14.1K
A Comparative Analysis of Complete Coverage Tooth Preparation Design and Scan Angulation on the Accuracy of Two
Ramya B Kabbin1, Arvind I Moldi1, Chaitra S Bulla1
1Department of Prosthodontics, HKE's S.Nijalingappa Institute of Dental Science and Research, Kalaburagi, Karnataka, India.
Journal of Pharmacy & Bioallied Sciences
|March 18, 2026
Summary
The Carestream intraoral scanner demonstrated superior accuracy compared to the TRIOS scanner for full-coverage dental preparations. This finding highlights Carestream
Area of Science:
- Digital Dentistry
- Dental Materials and Technology
- Prosthodontics
Background:
- Intraoral scanners (IOS) are transforming dental practices, but their accuracy is influenced by preparation design and scanning angles.
- Assessing IOS accuracy is crucial for reliable digital impressions in restorative dentistry.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the impact of full-coverage preparation design and scan angulation on the accuracy of two intraoral scanners: TRIOS and Carestream 3600.
- To compare the performance of TRIOS and Carestream 3600 in single restoration digital impressions, with and without adjacent teeth.
Main Methods:
- A maxillary typodont with six full-coverage preparations was utilized for the study.
- Scans were performed using both TRIOS and Carestream 3600, with and without adjacent teeth (STL A and STL B, respectively).
- Data analysis involved independent t-tests and between-subjects analysis using SPSS v21.
Main Results:
- The Carestream scanner exhibited significantly lower discrepancies than the TRIOS scanner for both Average Absolute Deviation (AAD) and Maximum Absolute Deviation (MAD), irrespective of the presence of adjacent teeth.
- Specifically, with adjacent teeth, Carestream showed lower AAD (2.1417 vs. 2.7567) and MAD (8.2009 vs. 8.7033).
- Without adjacent teeth, Carestream also demonstrated lower AAD (1.6178 vs. 1.9783) and MAD (7.6030 vs. 8.2059).
Conclusions:
- The Carestream intraoral scanner consistently provided higher accuracy than the TRIOS scanner.
- This enhanced accuracy was observed regardless of the presence or absence of adjacent teeth.
- The findings confirm the reliability of the Carestream scanner for capturing digital impressions in diverse clinical scenarios involving full-coverage preparations.
