Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A proper model analysis forms a vital part of the orthodontic diagnosis process, but it remains a time-consuming procedure. In day-to-day practice, many orthodontists assess the models subjectively, without applying analytical tests, due to the time it takes to do proper model analysis.1,2 Plaster dental models have long been the gold standard for orthodontic study model analysis and to calculate the Bolton index for tooth size disproportions, as well as intra-arch space discrepancies.3,4 Vernier callipers or needle pointed dividers are traditionally used to perform measurements on dental models.5 More recently digital orthodontic study models that are computer-based have been developed and have the potential to replace the traditional plaster orthodontic models.6 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to do model analysis on one hundred orthodontic cases by making use of three different measuring tools. The objective was to see if a difference exists with regards to the measurements produced by the three different instruments and to compare the instruments with each other. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Three different instruments were used to measure Ave values on one hundred orthodontic study models. The three instruments included a Boley Gauge, Digital Vernier Calliper and Carestream 3600 scanner with accompanying software. The five values measured on the study models were: maxillary intercanine width, maxillary intermolar width, mesio-distal width of tooth 11, mesio-distal width of tooth 46 and mesio-distal width of tooth 41. RESULTS: The statistical analysis performed showed that the difference in measurements produced by the three instruments were not statistically significant for the inter-molar width (p = 0.849), intercanine width (p = 0.657), mesio-distal width of tooth 11 (p = 0.178) and mesio-distal width of tooth 41 (p = 0.240 The difference in measurements for the mesio-distal width of tooth 46 were statistically significant (p<0.01). However no clinically significant difference was found when the measurements produced by the three instruments were compared. CONCLUSIONS: All three of the instruments produced accurate measurements and can be used confidently when doing a comprehensive study model analysis for orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. The values produced were similar for all three instruments with insignificant differences between the three.
Highlights
A proper model analysis forms a vital part of the orthodontic diagnosis process, but it remains a timeconsuming procedure
Plaster dental models have long been the gold standard for orthodontic study model analysis and to calculate the Bolton index for tooth size disproportions, as well as intra-arch space discrepancies.[3,4]
Conventional plaster orthodontic study models have long been proven to be the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment planning in orthodontics
Summary
A proper model analysis forms a vital part of the orthodontic diagnosis process, but it remains a timeconsuming procedure. Some of the fundamental factors of the diagnosis include: space analysis, arch form, tooth sizes and tooth-arch discrepancies.[7]. A comprehensive model analysis is a vital part in the orthodontic diagnostic process and should always be included. Orthodontic study models are used to plan treatment and to determine the extent of space deficiency or tooth material discrepancy. A conventional model analysis consists of measuring the arch form, width and length as well as the intercanine and intermolar width. Conventional plaster orthodontic study models have long been proven to be the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment planning in orthodontics. The plaster models have the advantage of being inexpensive
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
