Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 46815

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"

Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018

Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."

Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018

Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."

Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
On Sep 2018

Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."

Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata

Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".

Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".

Dr. Mamta Gupta
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018

Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.

Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."

Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
On May 11,2011

Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."

Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
On April 2011

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.

Dr. Anuradha
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2023 | Month : March | Volume : 17 | Issue : 3 | Page : ZC01 - ZC05 Full Version

Comparative Evaluation of Accuracy of Reconstructed 3D Printed Rapid Prototyping Models and Conventional Stone Models with Different Ranges of Crowding: An In-vitro Study

Published: March 1, 2023 | DOI:
Ankita M Mohite, Lalita G Nanjannawar, Jiwanasha M Agrawal, Sangamesh Fulari, Shraddha Shetti, Vishwal Kagi, Amol Shirkande, Sanjivani Gofane

1. Postgraduate, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed To Be University, Sangli, Maharashtra, India. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed To Be University, Sangli, Maharashtra, India. 3. Professor and Head, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed To Be University, Sangli, Maharashtra, India. 4. Associate Professor, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed To Be University, Sangli, Maharashtra, India. 5. Associate Professor, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed To Be University, Sangli, Maharashtra, India. 6. Assistant Professor, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed To Be University, Sangli, Maharashtra, India. 7. Assistant Professor, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Bha

Correspondence Address :
Ankita M Mohite,
Yashaswi, Co. Op. Hos. Soc., Flat No.: 503, Govind Bachaji Road, Charai, Thane (W), Maharashtra, India.


Introduction: The digitalisation of dental models has made significant contribution to the current success of orthodontic practices. Rapid Prototyping (RP) is an innovative method of producing physical objects based on Computer-Aided Design (CAD) Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAM).

Aim: To compare the accuracy of the Three-Dimensional (3D) printed rapid prototyped models with orthodontic stone models across different ranges of crowding.

Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study carried out at the Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed to be University, Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, Maharashtra, India during September 2019 to September 2020. A total of 36 rapid prototyped models were reconstructed from stone models using Light Emitting Diode (LED) scanner and Digital Light Processing (DLP) technology. Dental stone models and RP models were evaluated using digital caliper for different linear measurements and arch dimensions. The data was analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 26.0. To evaluate accuracy, t-test analyses and Bland-Altman plotting were performed.

Results: T-test showed statistically non significant difference in all parameters of measurements of RP models when compared to stone models. According to Bland-Altman plotting. The mean difference between stone and RP models for the various degree of crowding was minimal and within ±0.07 mm in all planes.

Conclusion: Discrepancy between dental plaster models and RP models were less than 0.5 mm which was considered clinically non significant. Suggesting that RP models can be effectively used as an alternative to stone models.


Digital orthodontics, Stereolithography, Three-dimensional printing

The incorporation of digital technologies into orthodontic practise has changed diagnosis and treatment planning from a traditional Two-Dimensional (2D) method to an advanced 3D approach (1). In recent years, improvements in digital imaging and modelling have allowed the creation of a virtual orthodontic patient that offers the 3D reconstruction of bony structure, soft tissue, and dentition (2). Digital models have a number of advantages, including ease of storage, data retrieval, time saving, cost-effectiveness, transferability, and also improved treatment quality (3).

Institutions have a legal binding to hold the patient records for up to 10 years (4). The problem of storage space can be handled by scanning and preserving past patient study models in digital format. However, there can be hesitation to dispose off these stone models, as there may be occasions, such as research work requirements or medico-legal circumstances, where tangible records are essential (5).

The 3D printing or RP is a new technology that can create graspable 3D objects directly from digital models, which can address the need for physical models when required (4). It is among of the most futuristic innovations that can translate a fevered imagination into hard reality. This method is classified as an additive manufacturing, where the physical model is constructed layer by layer, once the digital model has been divided into layers of a specific thickness (4). This can be achieved through various techniques such as Stereolithography (SLA), Inkjet-based system (3D printing -3DP), Selective Laser Sintering (SLS), Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) and DLP (6).

Any inaccuracy in the printing of working models may cause insufficient tooth movements and have a detrimental effect on treatment outcomes (7). Few studies have reported acceptable clinical accuracy of RP models in comparison with conventional stone models (3),(8). However, there is scarcity of information regarding impact of crowding on the precision of measurements done on reconstructed RP models. Teeth can overlap in crowded area and it may be more difficult to accurately replicate the undercut sections that are blocked from the sensor’s view while scanning. Hence, accuracy and reproducibility of RP models must be carefully evaluated.

The aim of this study was to elucidate whether the tooth measurements recorded on stone models and 3D printed RP models with different ranges of crowding are equivalent and comparable.

Material and Methods

This in-vitro investigation was carried out carried out in the department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics at the Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed to be University, Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, Maharashtra, India. Duration of the study, from September 2019 to September 2020. On June 20, 2019, the Institutional Ethical Committee accepted the study (Letter number: BVDUMC&H/IEC/Dissertation2018-19/D-02). The procedure of study was followed in conformity with the Institute’s ethical standards. Prior to the impression, the volunteer’s informed consent was obtained.

Inclusion criteria: The inclusion criteria of study models were completely erupted, permanent teeth from first molar to contra-lateral first molar with mild, moderate, or severe crowding and good surface details.

Exclusion criteria: Patients who had undergone or were undergoing orthodontic treatment, as well as those with voids or fractures, aberrant tooth shapes and surfaces, or extra teeth, were eliminated from the study.

Sample size calculation: The sample size was estimated using SPSS Software based on a previous study conducted by Wan Hassan WN et al., (4). Approximately, 34 samples per group (Dental stone models group and RP models group) were required. To improve the power of the study, the number of models per group was increased to 36 with a difference of 0.15 mm and a standard deviation of 0.22 mm at the 5% level of significance (80% power Type I error to be 5% Type II error to be 20%).

Study Procedure

Impressions were made by using alginate impression material and positive replicas were made by using type III dental stone. A total of 36 dental stone models with crowding were collected. Crowding was calculated by comparing the total mesiodistal breadth of the teeth to the available space in the arch. According to the Proffit WR, crowding was divided into three categories: mild (1-4 mm), moderate (5-8 mm), and severe (>9 mm) (9). Based on crowding the 36 models were subdivided into 3 groups of 12 each.

To generate 3D digital models, all dental stone models were scanned by using a Hybrid with Blue LED scanner (MeditIdentica with accuracy of 7μm) in multiple planes (Table/Fig 1). Scanned data was saved as Standard Tessellation Language (STL) file (Table/Fig 2). The data were sliced into individual layers by Mesh-Meshmixer software. Scanned data were uploaded to reconstruct 36 RP models with Nextdent 5100 3D System Printer using DLP technology. The printing material comprised of high performance Biobased Acrylate Photocurable Resin (BAPR) (Table/Fig 3).

A total of 72 models consisting of 36 samples each of dental stone models (Group A) and RP models (Group B) were measured with hand-held digital vernier caliper. Clinically significant parameters, such as tooth size dimensions and arch dimensions, were measured to determine whether the quality of the RP models would be clinically acceptable for linear measurements (Table/Fig 4),(Table/Fig 5),(Table/Fig 6) (4).

Three study model pairings, one from each category, were randomly chosen in order to evaluate operator dependability. Each study model was measured using vernier caliper by the same examiner twice, with an interval of atleast two weeks, to ensure intra-examiner reliability. To determine inter-operator reliability, the first measurements were compared to those acquired by a second examiner using vernier caliper.

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was done using SPSS V26.0 at level of significance p≤0.05. All readings obtained were statistically analysed by calculating their mean, standard deviation and standard error. The Shapiro-Wilk test was used to determine the normality of numerical data, and it was discovered that the data followed a normal curve. As a result, parametric tests have been employed for comparisons. The t-test was used to compare the two groups among themselves. To evaluate the internal consistency and agreement between two or more examiners by using Cronbach’s alpha and intraclass correlation (inter and intra). A technique for describing agreement between two quantitative data by creating limits of agreements is the Bland-Altman Plot.


The present study comprised of 12 sets of study models for each category of crowding. The mean systemic differences in all parameters of measurements of RP models when compared to stone models were statistically non significant. Mesiodistal width values of RP models were smaller in moderate crowding (mean 7.71 and 7.63 mm; SD, 0.52 and 0.55 mm). Buccolingual width values of teeth in RP models were smaller than dental stone models with mild and severe crowding whereas, larger in moderate crowding (mean 5.9 and 6.01 mm; SD). In clinical crown height measurements were equivalent in mild and severe crowding (mean 7.64 and 7.55 mm). Curvilinear measurements of buccal and lingual surfaces of central incisor and first premolar in RP models were smaller than dental stone models with mild and severe crowding whereas they were larger in moderate crowding (Table/Fig 7). Arch dimensions of teeth in RP models were smaller than dental stone models with moderate and severe crowding whereas they were equivalent in mild crowding. The intraoperator ICC values ranged from 0.839 to 0.987 and had an excellent agreement (0.62) (4).

Using the mean and standard deviation of the differences between two measurements, the Bland-Altman Plot was calculated by plotting the data on the XY axis, where the X axis indicates the difference between the two measurements and the Y axis displays the mean of the two measurements. For the different degree of crowding in all planes, the mean bias between stone and RP models was minimal and was within ±0.07 mm (Table/Fig 8).


This study evaluated the potential use of RP models constructed using 3D printing as an alternative to stone models. The scanning and printing methods are two elements that could impact the calibre of RP models (10). In present study, MeditIdentica Hybrid with Blue LED scanner was used with three multiplaner cameras and colour-texture support, enabling technicians to form highly digital model. Additionally, scanning into the deep occlusal areas was made possible by Intelligent Multi-View (IMV) technology, providing more precision and information (10),(11),(12).

In present study, the models were produced using the 3D printer (Nextdent 5100 3D system printer with DLP technology) with 350 μm accuracy, good surface finishing, and extraordinary high feature resolution (5-50 μm) (13). The accuracy and truthfulness of dental models created using various 3D printing processes were evaluated by Kim SY et al., (14). In comparison to the Fused Filament Fabrication (FFF) and SLA procedures, they discovered that the PolyJet and DLP techniques were more accurate.

The printing material used in the present study comprised of high performance composite- BAPR with 0.089 to 0.102 mm thick layers. It has the best mechanical performance of any other biobased resin, with a tensile strength of 7.0 MPa (13). A significant consideration for the application in a stereolithographic layer-by-layer printing process is the resin’s viscosity. Low viscosities are typically preferred to enable adequate recoating of the liquid resin between the last layer of the model and the surface of the resin tank. In comparison to autodesk standard clear prototyping resin, BAPR has a lower viscosity (13).

In the present study, comparison of the various tooth measurements was made on 3D printed models and dental stone models with different degrees of crowding. In all parameters, the results demonstrated that differences were statistically non significant. Similar research on the precision of 3D printed models using various parameters are summarised in (Table/Fig 9) (3),(4),(14),(15),(16),(17),(18).

Stone models have smooth surface and clearly defined interproximal contact points and cervical edges. Insignificant artifacts such as air bubbles and slightly excessive stone materials were observed, however, they were minor and away from the landmarks utilised for measurements. Also, the surfaces of the RP models were coarse showing flaky appearance. At a crowded area, the clinical impression was less defined and more likely to have a slight surplus of artifacts. The clinical implication of this reduction in detail was not easy to quantify. But such loss in the details may not necessarily be critical for construction of orthodontic appliances, since the shape and size of the teeth and arch form of 3D printing models were similar to the original casts (4). According to Sweeney S et al., a successful occlusion is defined as an interarch distance with an inaccuracy of less than 0.5 mm (as opposed to the gold standard) (17). Based on clinical validity and the benchmark established by the American Board of Orthodontics’ increments for grading plaster models, the range of error (0.5 mm) was determined (17). In the present study, the mean systemic differences were small and statistically non significant, suggesting that RP models might be used interchangeably with dental stone models. For craniofacial surgeries, if discrepancies are within 1.0 mm then they are clinically acceptable (4).

Reconstructed models are becoming more and more useful as a tool for difficult craniofacial case visualisation, diagnosis, and surgery planning. It helps to achieve better-operating results, and provide an opportunity to study and manipulate the bone structures of the patient as required before the actual surgery (19). RP models of the jaws are used as an aid for the fabrication of distractor to produce osteogenic distraction of the mandibular symphysis (15). It is also used to produce customised lingual brackets for subsequent investment. RP also act as a valuable tool for preparation of dental socket in autotransplantation cases. In production of Invisalign, RP offers advantages of high accuracy with speed (20). RP versions have a number of benefits, including being lightweight, durable, highly resistant to abrasion, transportable, and most importantly, the capacity to share digital data (1). There is a great potential to create physical models on demand from digital data, which would alleviate the strain of the storage space issue.


The results of this study, does not specify precision of appliances created using RP models. Further studies need to analyse and focus on precision of these appliances for clinical use. It is also possible to rebuild data for 3D printers directly from other data sources, such as Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) Computed Tomography (CT) (CBCT) or Computed tomography (CT) scans. However, more research is required on these areas which will emphasis on the accuracy using sources from CBCT or CT scans to rebuild data using RP.


In present study, the mean systemic differences in all parameters of measurements of RP models when compared to stone models were statistically non significant. Hence, it can be concluded that RP models can be used as alternative to stone models. It is anticipated that 3D printed objects will become more significant in a variety of orthodontic research areas. This includes the use of technology not only to bring about changes in existing pattern but also to enable new things that were previously impossible.


Taneva E, Kusnoto B, Evans CA. 3D scanning, imaging, and printing in orthodontics. Issues in Contemporary Orthodontics. 2015;148(5):862-67. [crossref]
Fleming PS, Marinho V, Johal A. Orthodontic measurements on digital study models compared with plaster models: a systematic review. Orthodo Craniofac Res. 2011;14(1):01-06. [crossref] [PubMed]
Kasparova M, Grafova L, Dvorak P, Dostalova T, Prochazka A, Eliasova H, et al. Possibility of reconstruction of dental plaster cast from 3D digital study models. Biomed Eng Online. 2013;12:49. [crossref] [PubMed]
Wan Hassan WN, Yusoff Y, Mardi NA. Comparison of reconstructed rapid prototyping models produced by 3-dimensional printing and conventional stone models with different degrees of crowding. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017;151(1):209-18. Doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.08.019. PMID: 28024776. [crossref] [PubMed]
McGuinness NJ, Stephens CD. Storage of orthodontic study models in hospital units in the U.K. Br J Orthod. 1992;19(3):227-32. Doi: 10.1179/bjo.19.3.227. PMID: 1390579. [crossref] [PubMed]
Zocchi G. New developments in 3D printing of composites: photocurable resins for UV-assisted processes 2016.
Bartkowiak T, Walkowiak-Sliziuk A. 3D printing technology in orthodontics-review of current applications. Journal of Stomatology. 2018;71(4):356-64. [crossref]
Sohmura T, Kojima T, Wakabayashi K, Takahashi J. Use of an ultrahigh-speed laser scanner for constructing three-dimensional shapes of dentition and occlusion. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;84(3):345-52. Doi: 10.1067/mpr.2000.109786. PMID: 11005909. [crossref] [PubMed]
Proffit WR, Fields HW, Larson B, Sarver DM. Contemporary orthodontics-e- book. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2018 Aug 6.
Kim MK, Kim JM, Lee YM, Lim YJ, Lee SP. The effect of scanning distance on the accuracy of intra-oral scanners used in dentistry. Clin Anat. 2019;32(3):430-38. Doi: 10.1002/ca.23334. Epub 2019 Feb 5. PMID: 30663815. [crossref] [PubMed]
Ender A, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;109(2):121-28. [crossref] [PubMed]
Flügge TV, Schlager S, Nelson K, Nahles S, Metzger MC. Precision of intraoral digital dental impressions with iTero and extraoral digitisation with the iTero and a model scanner. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013;144(3):471-78. [crossref] [PubMed]
Voet VSD, Strating T, Schnelting GHM, Dijkstra P, Tietema M, Xu J, et al. Biobased acrylate photocurable resin formulation for stereolithography 3D printing. Acs Omega. 2018;3(2):1403-08. [crossref] [PubMed]
Kim SY, Shin YS, Jung HD, Hwang CJ, Baik HS, Cha JY. Precision and trueness of dental models manufactured with different 3-dimensional printing techniques. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2018;153(1):144-53. [crossref] [PubMed]
Hazeveld A, Slater JJ, Ren Y. Accuracy and reproducibility of dental replica models reconstructed by different rapid prototyping techniques. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014;145(1):108-15. [crossref] [PubMed]
Keating AP, Knox J, Bibb R, Zhurov AI. A comparison of plaster, digital and reconstructed study model accuracy. Journal of Orthodontics. 2008;35(3):191-201. [crossref] [PubMed]
Sweeney S, Smith DK, Messersmith M. Comparison of 5 types of interocclusal recording materials on the accuracy of articulation of digital models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015;148(2):245-52. [crossref] [PubMed]
Mack S, Bonilla T, English JD, Cozad B, Akyalcin S. Accuracy of 3-dimensional curvilinear measurements on digital models with intraoral scanners. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017;152(3):420-25. [crossref] [PubMed]
Mahamood S, Khader MA, Ali H. Applications of 3-D printing in orthodontics: a review. International Journal of Scientific Study. 2016;3(11):267-70.
Wang S, Li M, Yang H, Liu Y, Sun Y. Application of computer aided design and fused deposition modeling technology in the digital manufacture of orthodontic study models. Biomed Res. 2017;28(8):0970-38X.

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2023/59169.17516

Date of Submission: Aug 16, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Oct 29, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Dec 22, 2022
Date of Publishing: Mar 01, 2023

• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes

• Plagiarism X-checker: Aug 17, 2022
• Manual Googling: Oct 31, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Dec 21, 2022 (14%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)