Comparative characteristics of trueness and precision among intraoral scanners (literature review)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32782/2415-8127.2025.71.17Keywords:
intraoral scanner, digital dentistry, trueness, precision, dental treatment, diagnostics, tooth, dentition, oral cavity, influential factorsAbstract
Introduction. Taking into account that intraoral scanners have become a key tool for obtaining high-precision three-dimensional images of teeth and jaws, the importance of analyzing the tueness and precision of various intraoral scanning systems remains a pressing task to ensure the accuracy and effectiveness of dental treatment, and which may also contribute to updating the criteria for choosing the most optimal equipment depending on the clinical situation and the influence of various factors that need to be taken into account.Objective. To study and systematize literature data on the parameters of trueness and precision of various intraoral scanning systems, as well as to conduct a comparative analysis of accuracy parameters related with various intraoral scanning systems, taking into account the influence of various factors.Methodology/Methods. The study was organized in the format of a literature review. The search for scientific sources in accordance with the purpose of the study was provided through the Google Scholar system (https://scholar.google.com/) using such keywords as “intraoral scanning”, “accuracy”, “intraoral scanner”, “trueness”, “precision”, “intraoral scanning technology” in various combinations using advanced search functions. A total of 30 sources of literature were analyzed, including clinical studies and reviews published in periodicals and dedicated to the comparison of different intraoral scanning models, taking into account various factors that may affect the accuracy of scanning.Results and Discussion. Different intraoral scanning models can vary significantly in scanning accuracy, and there are many factors that affect the accuracy and precision of digital impressions: intraoral scanners’ hardware and software, the experience of the doctor, the characteristics of the scanning surface, different technologies and information processing mechanisms, scanning principles, type, color and formation principles of the resulting image, surface material, tooth preparation design, width and geometry of the dentition, and scanning strategy. In addition, the choice of an appropriate material for the reference standard model (e.g., metal, plastic) is crucial, since the optical reflection of the surface plays a significant role in determining the accuracy of the impression, which must be taken into account when evaluating the scan results.Conclusions. The results of the literature review and analytical processing of data presented in previous studies demonstrated a significant difference in accuracy and precision between different intraoral scanning systems. None of the analyzed influencing factors can be considered responsible for the critical differences in the obtained scanning accuracy results registered when comparing different intraoral scanning systems.
References
Mourouzis P. Critical methodological factors influencing the accuracy of intraoral scanners in digital dentistry research. Comput Biol Med. 2025;187:109780. DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2025.109780
Chen Y, Zhai Z, Li H, Yamada S, Matsuoka T, Ono S, et al. Influence of liquid on the tooth surface on the accuracy of intraoral scanners: an in vitro study. J Prosthodont. 2021 May 29;31(1):59-64. DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13358
Diker B, Tak Ö. Comparing the accuracy of six intraoral scanners on prepared teeth and effect of scanning sequence. J Adv Prosthod. 2020 Oct 26;12(5):299-306. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2020.12.5.299
Ender A, Zimmermann M, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete-and partial-arch impressions of actual intraoral scanning systems in vitro. Int J Comput Dent. 2019 Jan 1;22(1):11-19.
Falih MY, Majeed MA. Trueness and precision of eight intraoral scanners with different finishing line designs: A comparative in vitro study. Eur J Dent. 2022 Dec 13;17(4):1056-1064. DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1757568
Ferrini F, Mazzoleni F, Barbini M, Coppo C, Di Domenico GL, Gherlone EF. Comparative Analysis of Intraoral Scanner Accuracy in a Six-Implant Complete-Arch Model: An In Vitro Study. Prosthesis. 2024;6(2):401-412. DOI: 10.3390/ prosthesis6020030
Gan N, Xiong Y, Jiao T. Accuracy of intraoral digital impressions for whole upper jaws, including full dentitions and palatal soft tissues. PloS one. 2016 Jul 6;11(7):e0158800206. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158800
Gavounelis NA, Gogola CMC, Halazonetis DJ. The effect of scanning strategy on intraoral scanner’s accuracy. Dent J. 2022 Jul 4; 10(7):123. DOI: 10.3390/dj10070123
Hwang HH, Chou C, Chen Y, Yao CC. An overview of digital intraoral scanners: past, present and future-from an orthodontic perspective. Taiwan J Orthod. 2018 Jan; 30(3):3. DOI: 10.30036/TJO.201810_31(3).0003
Kachhara S, Nallaswamy D, Ganapathy DM, Sivaswamy V, Rajaraman V. Assessment of intraoral scanning technology for multiple implant impressions – A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2020 Apr-Jun;20(2):141-152. DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_379_19
Kim RJY, Park JM, Shim JS. Accuracy of 9 intraoral scanners for complete-arch image acquisition: A qualitative and quantitative evaluation. J Prosthet Dent. 2018 Jul 10;120(6):895-903. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.01.035
Lee KM. Comparison of two intraoral scanners based on three-dimensional surface analysis. Prog Orthod. 2018 Feb 12;19(1):6. DOI: 10.1186/s40510-018-0205-5
Mangano FG, Hauschild U, Veronesi G, Imburgia M, Mangano C, Admakin O. Trueness and precision of 5 intraoral scanners in the impressions of single and multiple implants: a comparative in vitro study. BMC Oral Health. 2019 Jun 6;19(1):101. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-019-0792-7
Medina-Sotomayor P, Pascual-Moscardo A, Camps I. Accuracy of 4 digital scanning systems on prepared teeth digitally isolated from a complete dental arch. J Prosthet Dent. 2019 May;121(5):811-820. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.08.020
Mejía JBC, Wakabayashi K, Nakamura T, Yatani H. Influence of abutment tooth geometry on the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining dental impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 2017 Sep;118(3):392-399. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.10.021
Müller P, Ender A, Joda T, Katsoulis J. Impact of digital intraoral scan strategies on the impression accuracy using the TRIOS Pod scanner. Quintessence Int. 2016 Apr 1;47(4):343-349. DOI: 10.3290/j.qi.a35524
Nagy Z, Simon B, Mennito A, Evans Z, Renne W, Vág J. Comparing the trueness of seven intraoral scanners and a physical impression on dentate human maxilla by a novel method. BMC Oral Health. Apr 7;20 (97):1-10. DOI: 10.1186/ s12903-020-01090-x
Nulty AB. A comparison of full arch trueness and precision of nine intra-oral digital scanners and four lab digital scanners. Dent J. 2021 Jun 23;9(7):75. DOI: 10.3390/dj9070075
Oh KC, Park JM, Moon HS. Effects of scanning strategy and scanner type on the accuracy of intraoral scans: a new approach for assessing the accuracy of scanned data. J Prosthodont. 2020 Jun 26;29(6):518-523. DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13158
Park JM, Kim RJY, Lee KW. Comparative reproducibility analysis of 6 intraoral scanners used on complex intracoronal preparations. J Prosthet Dent. 2019 Apr 23;123(1):113-120. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2018.10.025
Park JM. Comparative analysis on reproducibility among 5 intraoral scanners: sectional analysis according to restoration type and preparation outline form. J Adv Prosthod. 2016 Oct 21;8(5): 354-362. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2016.8.5.354
Rathee M, Narwal S, Mittal S, Tomar S, Diwan K, Balavignesh S. Intraoral Scanners in Dentistry: A Review. HTAJOCD. 2024 Jan-Feb;16(3):41-44. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10682713
Renne W, Ludlow M, Fryml J, Schurch Z, Mennito A, Kessler R, et al. Evaluation of the accuracy of 7 digital scanners: An in vitro analysis based on 3-dimensional comparisons. J Prosthet Dent. 2017 Jul; 118(1):36-42. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.09.024
Revilla-León M, Jiang, P, Sadeghpour M, Piedra-Cascón W, Zandinejad A, Özcan M, et al. Intraoral digital scans – Part 1: Influence of ambient scanning light conditions on the accuracy (trueness and precision) of different intraoral scanners. J Prosthet Dent. 2020 Sep; 124(3):372-378. DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2019.06.003
Richert R, Goujat A, Venet L, Viguie G, Viennot S, Robinson P, Ducret M. Intraoral scanner technologies: a review to make a successful impression. J Healthc Eng. 2017 Sept 5;1:8427595. DOI: 10.1155/2017/8427595.
Sindhu S, Maiti S, Nallaswamy D. Factors affecting the accuracy of intraoral scanners-a systematic review. Ann Dent Specy. 2023;11(1-2023):40-52. DOI: 10.51847/izu17ACVUd
Stefanelli LV, Franchina A, Pranno A, Pellegrino G, Ferri A, Pranno N, et al. Use of intraoral scanners for full dental arches: could different strategies or overlapping software affect accuracy?. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Sep 22;18(19):9946. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18199946
Winkler J, Gkantidis N. Trueness and precision of intraoral scanners in the maxillary dental arch: an in vivo analysis. Sci Rep. 2020 Jan 24; 10(1):1172. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-58075-7
Zimmermann M, Mehl A, Mörmann WH, Reich S. Intraoral scanning systems-a current overview. Int J Comput Dent. 2015 Jan 1;18(2):101-129. DOI: 10.5167/uzh-120044
Zimmermann M, Ender A, Mehl A. Local accuracy of actual intraoral scanning systems for single-tooth preparations in vitro. J Am Dent Assoc. 2020;151(2):127-135. DOI: 10.1016/j.adaj.2019.10.022
