Use of intraoral scanners for full dental arches: could different strategies or overlapping software affect accuracy?

Objectives: The use of digital devices is strongly influencing the dental rehabilitation workflow both for single-crown rehabilitation and for full-arch prosthetic treatments. Methods: In this study, trueness was analyzed by overlapping the scan dataset made with Medit I-500 (by using two different tips and two different scan strategies) with the scan dataset made with lab scanning, and the values of the (90ffi -10ffi)/2 method were reported. Precision was evaluated by using the same values of trueness coming from the intra-group overlapping (scan dataset made with an IOS overlapped and compared to each other). Moreover, two different software programs of overlapping were used to calculate accuracy values. Results: The mean difference of trueness was 26.61 +/- 5.07 mu m with the suggested strategy of intraoral scanning and using a new design of the tip, 37.99 +/- 4.94 mu m with the suggested strategy of intraoral scanning and using the old design of the tip, and 51.22 +/- 6.57 mu m with a new strategy of intraoral scanning and using the old design of the tip. The mean difference of precision was 23.57 +/- 5.77 mu m with the suggested strategy of intraoral scanning and using a new design of the tip, 38.34 +/- 11.39 mu m with the suggested strategy of intraoral scanning and using the old design of the tip, and 46.93 +/- 7.15 mu m with a new strategy of intraoral scanning and using the old design of the tip. No difference was found in the trueness and precision data extracted using the two different programs of superimposition Geomagic Control X and Medit Compare. Conclusions: The outcomes of this study showed that the latest version of I-Medit 500 with the use of a new tip seems to be promising in terms of accuracy when a full arch needs to be scanned. Moreover, Medit Compare, which is an application of Medit IOS software, can be used to calculate IOS accuracy