• Home
  • Sitemap
  • Contact us

Article View

Forthcoming Articles

Anat Cell Biol

Published online October 22, 2021

https://doi.org/10.5115/acb.21.136

Copyright © Korean Association of ANATOMISTS.

Quantitative and qualitative evaluation on the accuracy of three intraoral scanners for human identification in forensic odontology

Eun-Jeong Bae1 , Eun-Jin Woo2

13D Printer Technology Analysis Research Team, Cybermed Inc., Daejeon, 2Department of History, College of Liberal Art, Sejong University, Seoul, Korea

Correspondence to:Eun-Jin Woo
Department of History, College of Liberal Art, Sejong University, Seoul 05006, Korea
E-mail: redqin@sejong.ac.kr

Received: July 2, 2021; Revised: August 30, 2021; Accepted: September 3, 2021

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to analyze the accuracy of intra oral scanner (IOS) to confirm the applicability of IOS for the recording and analysis of tooth morphology in forensics. The less damaged mandible specimen with many teeth remaining was scanned three times using three types of intraoral scanners (CS3600, i500, and Trios3). For quantitative comparisons of the scanned images produced by these intraoral scanners, root mean square (RMS) values were computed using a three-dimensional analysis program and a one-way ANOVA was conducted with Tukey HSD (honestly significant difference) as a post-hoc analysis (α=0.05). The repeatability of the full scan data was highest with the i500 (0.14±0.03 mm), and the post-hoc analysis confirmed significant differences between the CS3600 and the i500 outcomes (P-value=0.003). The repeatability of the partial scan data for the teeth in the mandible was highest with the i500 (0.08±0.02 mm), and the post-hoc analysis confirmed significant differences between the CS3600 and the i500 (P-value=0.016). The precision of the full scan data was highest with the i500 (0.16±0.01 mm) but the differences were not statistically significant (P-value=0.091). Meanwhile, the precision of the partial scan data for the teeth in the mandible was highest with the Trios3 (0.22±0.02 mm), but the differences were not statistically significant (P-value=0.762). Considering that the scanning of other areas of the oral cavity in addition to the teeth is important in forensic odontology, the i500 scanner appears to be the most appropriate intraoral scanner for human identification. However, as the scope of oral scanning is generally limited to teeth in the practice of dentistry, additional discussions of how to apply the IOS in forensic odontology are needed. Ultimately, the results here can contribute to the overall discussion of the forensic applicability dental data produced by intraoral scanners.

Keywords: Forensic odontology, Human identification, Intraoral scanner, Accuracy, Tooth

Share this article on :