Skip to main content


Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Table 3 Precision (mean ± SD), in μm, for partially and fully edentulous maxilla, and p values testing the scanner by model interaction

From: Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology: a comparative in vitro study

Scanner Partially edentulous maxilla Fully edentulous maxilla p-value1
Mean precision (± SD) Mean precision (± SD)
CS 3600® 24.8 (±4.6) 65.5 (±16.7) 0.01
Trios 3® 24.5 (±3.7) 31.5 (±9.8) 0.3
Cerec Omnicam® 26.3 (±1.5) 57.2 (±9.1) 0.006
True Definition® 19.5 (±3.1) 75.3 (±43.8) 0.08
  1. N = 5 scans for each scanner and model type
  2. The same symbol after SD indicates differences in precision between scanner pairs (Tukey adjustment for multiple comparison). Minimum signicant difference across scanners: 7.2 μm and 51.2 μm for partially and fully edentulous maxilla models, respectively
  3. 1 p-value testing of the interaction between scanner and model type (partially vs fully edentulous maxilla) from t-tests taking into account the heterogeneity of variances (Satterthwaite method). A p-value > 0.05 indicates no difference in scanner precision according to model type