透過您的圖書館登入
IP:216.73.216.211
  • 學位論文

掃描用粉末對於掃描影像準確度之影響

Effect of the scanning powder on the accuracy of the digital scanning process

指導教授 : 林立德

摘要


實驗目的 隨著數位和生產技術的進步,利用電腦輔助設計(computer-aided design, CAD)和電腦輔助製造(computer-aided manufacturing, CAM)的方式在牙科進行診斷和治療病人已經成為一種趨勢,特別是在製作固定義齒方面,而近期的一些研究也顯示利用口內掃描機,相較於傳統印模來製作固定義齒,在某些方面都具有許多優點。目前許多CAD/CAM 系統可以把傳統的石膏模型,利用模型掃描機進行掃描,在軟體上進行設計,製作出牙冠,而透過這種方式,還是需要經過傳統印模和灌模的步驟,而有印模、灌模的體積膨脹收縮和變形的誤差。如果利用口內掃描機,則可跳過傳統印模的步驟,減去這個部分的誤差。另外,利用口內掃瞄機來進行掃描,相較於傳統印模,會比較節省時間,並且節省材料的支出。目前許多廠商已經研發出許多口掃機的系統,提供牙醫師在臨床上使用。 目前市面上的口內掃描機,有些需要經過噴粉,才能進行掃描,有些卻不用。噴粉的目的是讓不同材料的表面,可以達到均質,增加掃描的效率跟準確度。不過對於噴粉這件事情,可能會有潛在的問題,包括附著在牙齒表面上的粉末被口水浸潤、粉末噴灑不均和粉末本身厚度所造成的差異,都會影響掃描的準確度。本實驗希望了解當使用口內掃描機,進行數位印模時,在牙齒表面上做噴粉,會不會對掃描的準確度有所影響。 實驗材料與方法 本實驗選用黃石膏塊作為實驗的樣本,大小為6cm x 2cm x 2cm,總共40 塊(n=40)。將其分成4 組,利用噴粉機(3M™ High-Resolution Sprayer),透過標準化的噴粉程序,在其中央2cm x 2cm x 2cm 的區域,分別進行1 秒鐘(n=10)、3 秒鐘(n=10)、5 秒鐘(n=10)、7 秒鐘(n=10)。將每一個噴粉前的黃石膏塊,利用模型掃描機(3shape D900 lab scanner)先進行掃描,得到一個數位模型檔案,當作reference scan。接著利用相同的石膏塊,經過標準化的噴粉程序過後,再掃描一次,得到另一個數位模型檔案,當作test scan。進一步將這兩個數位模型檔案,在軟體(Geomagic® Control software)上做疊合,得到噴粉區域的最大高度差異及面積,分析經過不同噴粉秒數後,所造成的粉末厚度差異。 實驗結果 噴粉1 秒鐘的組別裡,高度差異最小為7.3 μm,最大為11.2 μm,平均為8.9±1.5μm;噴粉3 秒鐘的組別裡,最小為7.4 μm,最大為13.2 μm,平均為10.0±2.2μm;噴粉5 秒鐘的組別裡,最小為9.0 μm,最大為19.4 μm,平均為13.9±3.5μm;噴粉7 秒鐘的組別裡,最小為8.4 μm,最大為19.3 μm,平均為13.3±3.1μm。利用皮爾森積差相關分析計算出來,噴粉秒數與高度差異的相關係數為0.576,表示中度相關。 噴粉1 秒鐘的組別裡,噴粉面積最小值為1.25%,最大為5.44%,平均為2.94±1.32%;噴粉3 秒鐘的組別裡,最小值為2.21%,最大為8.81%,平均為5.07±2.76%;噴粉5 秒鐘的組別裡,最小為3.22%,最大為12.51%,平均為8.37±3.35%;噴粉7 秒鐘的組別裡,最小為3.09%,最大為12.45 %,平均為8.65±3.01%。利用皮爾森積差相關分析計算出來,噴粉秒數與噴粉面積的相關係數為0.651,表示中度相關。 結論 1. 使用口內掃描機進行數位印模時,掃描用粉末所產生的厚度差異,對於掃瞄準確度會有影響。 2. 噴粉厚度和粉末覆蓋面積,會隨著噴粉秒數的增加而增加。 3. 隨著噴粉秒數的增加,噴粉厚度與粉末覆蓋面積呈現高度相關。

並列摘要


Research goal The purpose of this study was to investigate the thickness of the spraying powder applied on the teeth when using the intraoral scanner, and the relationship between the spraying time、thickness of the powder and the covering area of the powder. Material and Methods Forty gypsum blocks (size: 6cm x 2cm x 2cm) were used as the testing samples. A reference scan was done with lab scanner (3shape D900 lab scanner) for each testing block before the standard powder spraying procedure. The testing blocks were divided into four groups according to the spraying time, and each group have 10 testing blocks (n=10). Scanning powder was applied with spraying machine(3M™ High-Resolution Sprayer ) to each testing blocks under different spraying time(1 sec、3 sec、5 sec、7 sec). A test scan was performed for each testing block after the powder spraying. Reference scan and test scan of each testing block were imported into the software (Geomagic® Control) and superimposed through best fit algorythm, for analyzing the thickness and the area of the powder. Statistical analyses were performed with descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation. Result The mean thickness of the spraying powder for each spraying time group : 8.9 μm (SD ± 1.5μm) for 1 sec、10.0 μm (SD ± 2.2μm) for 3 sec、13.9 μm(SD ± 3.5μm) for 5 sec and 13.3 μm (SD±3.1μm) for 7 sec. The mean area proportion of the spraying powder for each spraying time group : 2.94% (SD ± 1.32%) for 1 sec 、 5.07% (SD ± 2.76%) for 3 sec、8.37% (SD ± 3.35%) for 5 sec and 8.65% (SD ± 3.01%) for 7 sec. Conclusion Based on the finding of this investigation, both powder thickness and powder spraying area increased with longer powder spraying time. The thickness of the powder ranged from 8.9 μm to 13.9 μm under reasonable spraying time. The thickness of the powder may influence the scanning accuracy, but it is clinical acceptable.

參考文獻


Abdel-Azim T, Rogers K, Elathamna E, Zandinejad A, Metz M, Morton D. Comparison of the marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with CAD/CAM technology by using conventional impressions and two intraoral digital scanners. J Prostate Dent 2015;114:554-59.
Ahlholm P, Sipila K, Vallittu P, Jakonen M, Kotiranta U. Digital versus conventional impressions in fixed prosthodontics: A review. J Prosthodont. 2018;27:35-41.
Alghazzawi TF. Advancements in CAD/CAM technology: Options for practical
implementation. J Prosthodont Res. 2016;60:72-84.
Almeida e Silva JS, Erdelt K, Edelhoff D, Araujo E, Stimmelmayr M, Vieira LC, Guth

延伸閱讀