European Annals of Dental Sciences Official Publication of Ankara University, Faculty of Dentistry E A D S EADS, 2023, 50 (2), 87–94 e-ISSN : 2757-6744 doi : 10.52037/eads.2023.0021 Article Received/Accepted : February, 3 2023 / June, 13 2023 Ethical Committee No : 2022/6 ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE Does the traditional or digital dental model measurement method affect the results?: A validation study Nurver Karslı ID 1,* , Zehra Yurdakul ID 1 , Merve Gonca ID 2 and Kutay Çava ID 3 1 Department of Orthodontics, Karadeniz Technical University Faculty of Dentistry, Trabzon, Turkey and 2 Department of Orthodontics, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University Faculty of Dentistry, Rize, Turkey and 3 Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey * Corresponding Author; dtnurverkarsli@hotmail.com Abstract The aim of this study is to evaluate the accuracy, reliability and reproducibility of measurements made on digital models obtained using OrthoAnalyzer (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) and Materialize 3-matic (MIMICS ®, Leuven, Belgium) software by comparing them with measurements made on dental plaster models. The teeth of 50 individuals were measured and plaster models were obtained. In addition, digital images were obtained from the patients with Trios intraoral scanner. A total of 30 linear measurements were made using OrthoAnalyzer and Materialize 3-matic software, including the mesiodistal width of the teeth, arch perimeter, intercanine and intermolar distances. All measurements were made by two different examiners. For the first and second measurements of the first examiner, intraexaminer reliability was calculated using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs), two-way mixed model, consistency type. The largest mean difference between Materialize 3-matic and caliper measurements was -0.136 mm in maxillary right first premolar and maxillary left lateral incisor. The smallest mean difference was -0.0029 mm in the mandibular left lateral incisor. In transverse measurements, the largest mean difference was found in the upper intercanine distance of 0.117 mm, and the smallest mean difference was -0.0086 mm in the upper intermolar distance. The largest mean difference between OrthoAnalyzer and caliper measurements was 0.107 mm in the maxillary right lateral incisor, and the smallest mean difference was -0.0049 mm in the maxillary left lateral incisor. Linear distance measurements with three-dimensional digital models are a valid, reliable and reproducible method compared to plaster models. Key words: 3D scanner; digital models; reliability Introduction For a successful orthodontic treatment, it is very important to make a detailed planning and model analysis. The literature states that dental model analysis should be performed before treatment for all patients who will undergo orthodontic treatment 1 . Thus, the ex- isting malocclusion can be accurately evaluated to achieve an ideal occlusal closure. The traditional method in dental model analysis is to take the measurements of the patient’s teeth and to obtain plaster models from these measurements. Dental analyses on the plaster model are made using a compass or caliper. With the devel- opments in computer technology, it has become possible to make orthodontic diagnoses and treatment planning using digital mod- els. Routine measurements can be made digitally for orthodontic diagnosis, overjet, overbite, tooth dimensions, arch lengths, and transversal distance measurements. In dental model analysis for these measurements, plaster models have been accepted as the gold standard for many years 2 . However, plaster models have many disadvantages. Among these issues are that models can be lost, broken, deformed over time, and require physical storage space 2 . To overcome these dis- advantages, three-dimensional digital models have been developed in recent decades. Digital orthodontic models have such advantages as archiving and accessibility, no risk of breakage or wear, easy throughput transfer between physicians, and obtaining diagnostic information equal to or better than plaster models. Furthermore, it is easier to make changes on the digital model throughput than on the plaster model, and it is possible to enlarge digital models and create precise cross-sectional images 2,3 . Digital models can be obtained by direct or indirect methods. How to cite: Karsli N, Yurdakul Z, Gonca M, Cava K. Does the traditional or digital dental model measurement method affect the results?: A validation study. EADS. 2023;50(2):87-94