Purohit Aastha, Paul Rahul, Golchha Vineet*, Yadav Deepti, Gupta Mudita and Sharma K Ish

Department of Orthodontics and Orthopaedics, Inderprastha Dental College and Hospital, Ghaziabad, India

*Corresponding Author: Golchha Vineet, Department of Orthodontics and Orthopaedics, Inderprastha Dental College and Hospital, Ghaziabad, India.

Received: June 20, 2022; Published: June 30, 2022

Abstract

Context: Model analysis is an important diagnostic tool and aids in framing dental treatment, but consumes a significant time. Mamillapalli., et al. the creators of application iModelAnalysis2 which performs mathematical calculations easily and accurately as part of model study analysis, claims to be faster, accurate and user friendly than conventional method.

Aims: This in-vitro study evaluates the efficacy and efficiency of the results achieved by iModelAnalysis2 application and compares it with the conventional method.

Methods and Material: Bolton analysis, Ashley Howes Analysis, Pont analysis, Linder Harth Analysis, Carey’s Analysis, Arch Perimeter Analysis model were performed on 30 casts. The duration of the count model analysis using conventional methods and app was recorded with a stopwatch. The results obtained were statistically compared for accuracy.

Results: The test results were non significant with p value of >0.05. This indicates that the overall results of analysis through both conventional and application means are equally accurate. The result of the comparison in the time taken to do the analysis through conventional means and application was highly significant with p value of 0.000.

Conclusions: This application has a great potential to aid clinician in quick calculations and thereby quicker diagnosis and treatment planning saving their crucial time with accurate result.

Keywords: Model Analysis; iModelAnalysis2; Bolton analysis; Ashley Howes Analysis; Pont; Carey’s Analysis

References

1. Kumar Mamillapalli P., et al. “Model Analysis on a Smartphone-The authors' Android-based app performs Bolton and other model analyses”. Journal of Clinical Orthodontics6 (2012): 356.
2. Rossini G., et al. “Diagnostic accuracy and measurement sensitivity of digital models for orthodontic purposes: A systematic review”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics2 (2016): 161-170.
3. Bolton WA. “The clinical application of a tooth-size analysis”. American Journal of Orthodontics7 (1962): 504-529.
4. Howes AE. “A polygon portrayal of coronal and basal arch dimensions in the horizontal plane”. American Journal of Orthodontics11 (1954): 811-831.
5. Joondeph DR., et al. “Pont's index: a clinical evaluation”. The Angle Orthodontist2 (1970): 112-118.
6. Leifert M F., et al. “Comparison of space analysis evaluations with digital models and plaster dental casts”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics1 (2009): 16-e1.
7. Indirayana V P., et al. “A comparison between orthodontic model analysis using conventional methods and iModelAnalysis”. Dental Journal (Majalah Kedokteran Gigi) 51.4 (2018): 173-178.
8. Fleming P S., et al. “Orthodontic measurements on digital study models compared with plaster models: a systematic review”. Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research1 (2011): 1-16.
9. Sousa M V S., et al. “Accuracy and reproducibility of 3-dimensional digital model measurements”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics2 (2012): 269-273

Citation

Citation: Golchha Vineet., et al. “Accuracy and Efficiency of Model Analysis Using an App Based Model Analysis Software ". Acta Scientific Dental Sciences 6.7 (2022): 140-146.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2022 Golchha Vineet., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.