Objective: To quantitatively evaluate the trueness of five chairside three-dimensional facial scanning techniques, and to provide reference for the application of oral clinical diagnosis and treatment.
Methods: The three-dimensional facial data of the subjects were collected by the traditional professional three-dimensional facial scanner Face Scan, which was used as the reference data of this study. Four kinds of portable three-dimensional facial scanners (including Space Spider, LEO, EVA and DS-FScan) and iPhone Ⅹ mobile phone (Bellus3D facial scanning APP) were used to collect three-dimensional facial data from the subjects. In Geomagic Studio 2013 software, through data registration, deviation analysis and other functions, the overall three-dimensional deviation and facial partition three-dimensional deviation of the above five chairside three-dimensional facial scanning technologies were calculated, and their trueness performance evaluated. Scanning time was recorded during the scanning process, and the subject's comfort was scored by visual analogue scale(VAS). The scanning efficiency and patient acceptance of the five three-dimensional facial scanning techniques were evaluated.
Results: DS-FScan had the smallest mean overall and mean partition three-dimensional deviation between the test data and the reference data, which were 0.334 mm and 0.329 mm, respectively. The iPhone Ⅹ mobile phone had the largest mean overall and mean partition three-dimensional deviation between the test data and the reference data, which were 0.483 mm and 0.497 mm, respectively. The detailed features of the three-dimensional facial data obtained by Space Spider were the best. The iPhone Ⅹ mobile phone had the highest scanning efficiency and the highest acceptance by the subject. The average scanning time of the iPhone Ⅹ mobile phone was 14 s, and the VAS score of the subjects' scanning comfort was 9 points.
Conclusion: Among the five chairside three-dimensional face scanning technologies, the trueness of the scan data of the four portable devices had no significant difference, and they were all better than the iPhone Ⅹ mobile phone scan. The subject with the iPhone Ⅹ scanning technology had the best expe-rience.
目的: 量化评价5种椅旁三维颜面扫描技术的正确度，为口腔临床诊疗应用提供参考。
方法: 使用传统专业型三维颜面扫描仪Face Scan采集受试者三维颜面数据，作为本研究的参考数据。分别使用4种便携式三维颜面扫描仪(Space Spider、LEO、EVA和DS-FScan)及iPhone Ⅹ手机(Bellus3D颜面扫描APP)，采集受试者三维颜面数据。在Geomagic Studio 2013中通过数据配准、偏差分析等功能计算上述5种椅旁三维颜面扫描技术的整体三维偏差和面部分区三维偏差，评价其正确度的表现。扫描过程中同时记录扫描时间，并对受试者舒适度采用视觉模拟评分法(visual analogue scale，VAS)进行评分，评价5种三维颜面扫描技术的扫描效率和患者接受度。
结果: 测试数据与参考数据间平均整体和平均分区三维偏差最小者均为DS-FScan(分别为0.334 mm和0.329 mm)，最大者均为iPhone Ⅹ手机(分别为0.483 mm和0.497 mm)。Space Spider获取的三维颜面数据的细节特征表现力最好。扫描效率最高和受试者接受度最高者均为iPhone Ⅹ手机，平均扫描时间为14 s，受试者扫描舒适度的VAS评分为9分。
结论: 5种椅旁三维颜面扫描技术中，4种便携式设备的扫描数据正确度没有显著差异，均优于iPhone Ⅹ手机的扫描数据，iPhone Ⅹ扫描技术的受试者体验最好。
Keywords: Computer-assisted image processing; Face; Three-dimensional imaging.