Search

Objective This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of model superimposition and automatic analysis for upper and lower dentition widths in iTero Progress Assessment during the clear aligner process. Methods Nineteen cases were included in this retrospective case control study. Pretreatment dental cast (T0) and post treatment dental cast after staged treatment (T1) were available for three-dimensional (3D) model superimposition. The movements of maxillary teeth in the horizontal plane (cross section) after staged treatment and the widths of upper and lower dentitions were measured by 3D model superimposition in real world and iTero Progress Assessment. The data collected from the two methods were compared. Results The movements [Median (upper and lower quartiles)] of maxillary teeth in the horizontal plane after staged treatment were 2.31 (1.59, 3.22) and 1.79 (1.21, 3.03) mm in iTero Progress Assessment and 3D model analysis, respectively. Significant difference was observed between the two groups (P<0.05). In the measurement of upper and lower dentition width, four indicators were measured, including intercanine width upper, intermolar width upper, intercanine width lower, and intermolar width lower. Before treatment, the measurement of iTero Progress Assessment were (35.78±2.49), (56.21±2.51), (27.43±1.38), (52.26±2.91) mm, respectively, and actual measurement were (35.77±2.53), (56.17±2.47), (27.40±1.41), (52.30±2.86) mm, respectively, without significant difference (P>0.05). After stage treatment, the measurement of iTero Progress Assessment were (37.37±2.86), (57.76±2.56), (28.89±2.00), (54.16±2.19) mm, respectively, and actual measurement were (37.29±2.94), (57.71±2.63), (28.88±2.05), (54.01±2.15) mm, respectively, and there was no significant difference (P>0.05). Conclusion The data from iTero Progress Assessment did not coincide with the model superimposition results with palate as reference. The accuracy of model superimposition in iTero Progress Assessment needs further investigation, whereas the arch width analysis is accurate. Therefore, iTero Progress Assessment results should be interpreted with caution by orthodontists in clinical applications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the pre-globalization era, when communication between nations was difficult and infrequent, and direct (experiential) or indirect (textual-descriptive) knowledge was scant, images of 'foreign countries' were frequently constructions based on inadequate information. As a result, fictional descriptions and images were the primary source for people to gain some knowledge of other nations. However, beginning with the great voyages of discovery of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, we began to step into an age of globalization, which generated the diversification of 'source texts' in this regard. Today, the emergence of new media has accelerated and proliferated such diversity. These new media texts now play a dominant role in forming the image of other countries, to some degree replacing traditional fictional texts. The basic presuppositions of comparative literature imagology have changed accordingly. Starting from the core concept of 'images', this paper discusses why it is necessary to integrate imagology, with 'semiotic images' as core concept, and 'communications research'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the accuracy of model superimposition and automatic analysis for upper and lower dentition widths in iTero Progress Assessment during the clear aligner process., Methods: Nineteen cases were included in this retrospective case control study. Pretreatment dental cast (T0) and post treatment dental cast after staged treatment (T1) were available for three-dimensional (3D) model superimposition. The movements of maxillary teeth in the horizontal plane (cross section) after staged treatment and the widths of upper and lower dentitions were measured by 3D model superimposition in real world and iTero Progress Assessment. The data collected from the two methods were compared., Results: The movements [Median (upper and lower quartiles)] of maxillary teeth in the horizontal plane after staged treatment were 2.31 (1.59, 3.22) and 1.79 (1.21, 3.03) mm in iTero Progress Assessment and 3D model analysis, respectively. Significant difference was observed between the two groups ( P <0.05). In the measurement of upper and lower dentition width, four indicators were measured, including intercanine width upper, intermolar width upper, intercanine width lower, and intermolar width lower. Before treatment, the measurement of iTero Progress Assessment were (35.78±2.49), (56.21±2.51), (27.43±1.38), (52.26±2.91) mm, respectively, and actual measurement were (35.77±2.53), (56.17±2.47), (27.40±1.41), (52.30±2.86) mm, respectively, without significant difference ( P >0.05). After stage treatment, the measurement of iTero Progress Assessment were (37.37±2.86), (57.76±2.56), (28.89±2.00), (54.16±2.19) mm, respectively, and actual measurement were (37.29±2.94), (57.71±2.63), (28.88±2.05), (54.01±2.15) mm, respectively, and there was no significant difference ( P >0.05)., Conclusions: The data from iTero Progress Assessment did not coincide with the model superimposition results with palate as reference. The accuracy of model superimposition in iTero Progress Assessment needs further investigation, whereas the arch width analysis is accurate. Therefore, iTero Progress Assessment results should be interpreted with caution by orthodontists in clinical applications.