Abstract

Use of additive manufacturing is growing rapidly in the orthotics field. This technology allows orthotics to be designed directly on digital scans of limbs. However, little information is available about scanners and 3D scans. The aim of this study is to look at the agreement between manual measurements, high-level and low-cost handheld 3D scanners. We took two manual measurements and three 3D scans with each scanner from 14 lower limbs. The lower limbs were divided into 17 sections of 30mm each from 180mm above the mid-patella to 300mm below. Time to record and to process the three 3D scans for scanners methods were compared with Student t-test while Bland-Altman plots were used to study agreement between circumferences of each section from the three methods. The record time was 97s shorter with high-level scanner than with the low-cost (p = .02) while the process time was nine times quicker with the low-cost scanner (p < .01). An overestimation of 2.5mm was found in high-level scanner compared to manual measurement, but with a better repeatability between measurements. The low-cost scanner tended to overestimate the circumferences from 0.1% to 1.5%, overestimation being greater for smaller circumferences. In conclusion, 3D scanners provide more information about the shape of the lower limb, but the reliability depends on the 3D scanner and the size of the scanned segment. Low-cost scanners could be useful for clinicians because of the simple and fast process, but attention should be focused on accuracy, which depends on the scanned body segment.

Highlights

  • The knee is the second most affected joint by osteoarthritis

  • We reported the absolute and relative bias and 95% limits of agreement (LoA) [32] and the 95% CI of Measurements agreement low-cost vs. high-level handheld 3D scanners bias and LoA, giving the precision of the estimates (SE; [33])

  • Our study showed that a high-level 3D scanner provides lower limb measurements with similar accuracy, but better repeatability

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The knee is the second most affected joint by osteoarthritis. Knee osteoarthritis has a world prevalence around 250 million people (3.8%), increasing with age [1,2]. Due to aging and increasing obesity, the prevalence of knee OA is expected to increase in developed countries in the 20 years [2]. A knee brace is a non-pharmacological treatment for knee osteoarthritis. Measurements agreement low-cost vs high-level handheld 3D scanners study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific roles of this author are articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section. Author’s commercial affiliation did not play any role in our study

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call