digital reference model (Dentsply Sirona)
86
Structured Review
Dentsply Sirona
digital reference model
Digital Reference Model, supplied by Dentsply Sirona, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/digital+model/digital+model+reference/pm42101548-45-9-19
Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
Digital Reference Model, supplied by Dentsply Sirona, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/digital+model/digital+model+reference/pm42101548-45-9-19
Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
digital reference model - by Bioz Stars,
2026-11
86/100 stars
Images
Related Articles
other:Article Title: Effect of three-segment scanning on the accuracy of intraoral scans in full-arch implant-supported rehabilitation: an in vitro study. Article Snippet: 89 90 2.2 Scanning procedures 91 To obtain a digital reference model, Control:Article Title: Effect of Micro-Osteoperforations on Orthodontic Tooth Movement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Article Snippet: Alkebsi et al , Jordan , split mouth , 3 months , 35 (losses to follow up: 3) , 16-24.6 (19.26 ± 2.48) , 24F, 8M , MOPs were performed using miniscrews (Aarhus Mini-Implant System, American Orthodontics, 1.5 × 6 mm), utilizing a handpiece to create 3 buccal perforations distal to the canine tooth. Each perforation measured 3-4 mm in depth and 1.5 mm in width, spaced 3 mm apart. MOP was not repeated at any interval. , Canine retraction, Maxilla , 3D digital models were superimposed at the rugae area from baseline to subsequent intervals using the Ceramill Map 400 scanner and Ceramill Mind design software. Canine displacement was measured on these superimposed models by assessing the middle projection of the distal surface of the maxillary canines. Additionally, intraoral measurements were taken using a digital caliper by measuring the distance from the upper mesial wing of the canine bracket to the upper distal wing of the second premolar bracket. Device: Combined; Digital Caliper (for bracket-to-bracket measurement) and Digital Scanning & Software (3Shape R900) (Ceramill Map 400 and Ceramill Mind software). .. Hashem et al , Egypt , split mouth , 4 months , 18 (losses to follow up: 0) MOP I (single): 9 MOP II (repeated): 9 Control: 18 , 15-22 MOP I (single): (16.78 ± 2.22) MOP II (repeated): (17.56 ± 2.65) , N/A , Three MOPs were performed distal to the maxillary canines, positioned halfway between the canine and the second premolar within the extraction space, each measuring 4 mm in depth and 1.6 mm in diameter, and repeated monthly for 4 months in Group II. , Canine retraction, Maxilla , The primary outcome was 4 month canine distal movement measured using 3D digital models created from alginate impressions (baseline and 4 month) scanned with a Primescan (Sirona Primescan Scanner, Dentsply Sirona, USA with a precision of 0.0021 mm precision) and analysed in Dolphin software (Dolphin Imaging version 11.9, Patterson Inc, Chatsworth, California, USA) where they were virtually positioned in a mutual position similar to the baseline scanned model, superimposing the Extraction:Article Title: Effect of Micro-Osteoperforations on Orthodontic Tooth Movement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Article Snippet: Alkebsi et al , Jordan , split mouth , 3 months , 35 (losses to follow up: 3) , 16-24.6 (19.26 ± 2.48) , 24F, 8M , MOPs were performed using miniscrews (Aarhus Mini-Implant System, American Orthodontics, 1.5 × 6 mm), utilizing a handpiece to create 3 buccal perforations distal to the canine tooth. Each perforation measured 3-4 mm in depth and 1.5 mm in width, spaced 3 mm apart. MOP was not repeated at any interval. , Canine retraction, Maxilla , 3D digital models were superimposed at the rugae area from baseline to subsequent intervals using the Ceramill Map 400 scanner and Ceramill Mind design software. Canine displacement was measured on these superimposed models by assessing the middle projection of the distal surface of the maxillary canines. Additionally, intraoral measurements were taken using a digital caliper by measuring the distance from the upper mesial wing of the canine bracket to the upper distal wing of the second premolar bracket. Device: Combined; Digital Caliper (for bracket-to-bracket measurement) and Digital Scanning & Software (3Shape R900) (Ceramill Map 400 and Ceramill Mind software). .. Hashem et al , Egypt , split mouth , 4 months , 18 (losses to follow up: 0) MOP I (single): 9 MOP II (repeated): 9 Control: 18 , 15-22 MOP I (single): (16.78 ± 2.22) MOP II (repeated): (17.56 ± 2.65) , N/A , Three MOPs were performed distal to the maxillary canines, positioned halfway between the canine and the second premolar within the extraction space, each measuring 4 mm in depth and 1.6 mm in diameter, and repeated monthly for 4 months in Group II. , Canine retraction, Maxilla , The primary outcome was 4 month canine distal movement measured using 3D digital models created from alginate impressions (baseline and 4 month) scanned with a Primescan (Sirona Primescan Scanner, Dentsply Sirona, USA with a precision of 0.0021 mm precision) and analysed in Dolphin software (Dolphin Imaging version 11.9, Patterson Inc, Chatsworth, California, USA) where they were virtually positioned in a mutual position similar to the baseline scanned model, superimposing the Software:Article Title: Effect of Micro-Osteoperforations on Orthodontic Tooth Movement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Article Snippet: Alkebsi et al , Jordan , split mouth , 3 months , 35 (losses to follow up: 3) , 16-24.6 (19.26 ± 2.48) , 24F, 8M , MOPs were performed using miniscrews (Aarhus Mini-Implant System, American Orthodontics, 1.5 × 6 mm), utilizing a handpiece to create 3 buccal perforations distal to the canine tooth. Each perforation measured 3-4 mm in depth and 1.5 mm in width, spaced 3 mm apart. MOP was not repeated at any interval. , Canine retraction, Maxilla , 3D digital models were superimposed at the rugae area from baseline to subsequent intervals using the Ceramill Map 400 scanner and Ceramill Mind design software. Canine displacement was measured on these superimposed models by assessing the middle projection of the distal surface of the maxillary canines. Additionally, intraoral measurements were taken using a digital caliper by measuring the distance from the upper mesial wing of the canine bracket to the upper distal wing of the second premolar bracket. Device: Combined; Digital Caliper (for bracket-to-bracket measurement) and Digital Scanning & Software (3Shape R900) (Ceramill Map 400 and Ceramill Mind software). .. Hashem et al , Egypt , split mouth , 4 months , 18 (losses to follow up: 0) MOP I (single): 9 MOP II (repeated): 9 Control: 18 , 15-22 MOP I (single): (16.78 ± 2.22) MOP II (repeated): (17.56 ± 2.65) , N/A , Three MOPs were performed distal to the maxillary canines, positioned halfway between the canine and the second premolar within the extraction space, each measuring 4 mm in depth and 1.6 mm in diameter, and repeated monthly for 4 months in Group II. , Canine retraction, Maxilla , The primary outcome was 4 month canine distal movement measured using 3D digital models created from alginate impressions (baseline and 4 month) scanned with a Primescan (Sirona Primescan Scanner, Dentsply Sirona, USA with a precision of 0.0021 mm precision) and analysed in Dolphin software (Dolphin Imaging version 11.9, Patterson Inc, Chatsworth, California, USA) where they were virtually positioned in a mutual position similar to the baseline scanned model, superimposing the Imaging:Article Title: Effect of Micro-Osteoperforations on Orthodontic Tooth Movement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Article Snippet: Alkebsi et al , Jordan , split mouth , 3 months , 35 (losses to follow up: 3) , 16-24.6 (19.26 ± 2.48) , 24F, 8M , MOPs were performed using miniscrews (Aarhus Mini-Implant System, American Orthodontics, 1.5 × 6 mm), utilizing a handpiece to create 3 buccal perforations distal to the canine tooth. Each perforation measured 3-4 mm in depth and 1.5 mm in width, spaced 3 mm apart. MOP was not repeated at any interval. , Canine retraction, Maxilla , 3D digital models were superimposed at the rugae area from baseline to subsequent intervals using the Ceramill Map 400 scanner and Ceramill Mind design software. Canine displacement was measured on these superimposed models by assessing the middle projection of the distal surface of the maxillary canines. Additionally, intraoral measurements were taken using a digital caliper by measuring the distance from the upper mesial wing of the canine bracket to the upper distal wing of the second premolar bracket. Device: Combined; Digital Caliper (for bracket-to-bracket measurement) and Digital Scanning & Software (3Shape R900) (Ceramill Map 400 and Ceramill Mind software). .. Hashem et al , Egypt , split mouth , 4 months , 18 (losses to follow up: 0) MOP I (single): 9 MOP II (repeated): 9 Control: 18 , 15-22 MOP I (single): (16.78 ± 2.22) MOP II (repeated): (17.56 ± 2.65) , N/A , Three MOPs were performed distal to the maxillary canines, positioned halfway between the canine and the second premolar within the extraction space, each measuring 4 mm in depth and 1.6 mm in diameter, and repeated monthly for 4 months in Group II. , Canine retraction, Maxilla , The primary outcome was 4 month canine distal movement measured using 3D digital models created from alginate impressions (baseline and 4 month) scanned with a Primescan (Sirona Primescan Scanner, Dentsply Sirona, USA with a precision of 0.0021 mm precision) and analysed in Dolphin software (Dolphin Imaging version 11.9, Patterson Inc, Chatsworth, California, USA) where they were virtually positioned in a mutual position similar to the baseline scanned model, superimposing the |