MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparative evaluation of Artec Leo hand-held scanner and iPad Pro for 3D scanning of cervical and craniofacial data: assessing precision, accuracy, and user experience
Comparative evaluation of Artec Leo hand-held scanner and iPad Pro for 3D scanning of cervical and craniofacial data: assessing precision, accuracy, and user experience
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparative evaluation of Artec Leo hand-held scanner and iPad Pro for 3D scanning of cervical and craniofacial data: assessing precision, accuracy, and user experience
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparative evaluation of Artec Leo hand-held scanner and iPad Pro for 3D scanning of cervical and craniofacial data: assessing precision, accuracy, and user experience
Comparative evaluation of Artec Leo hand-held scanner and iPad Pro for 3D scanning of cervical and craniofacial data: assessing precision, accuracy, and user experience

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Comparative evaluation of Artec Leo hand-held scanner and iPad Pro for 3D scanning of cervical and craniofacial data: assessing precision, accuracy, and user experience
Comparative evaluation of Artec Leo hand-held scanner and iPad Pro for 3D scanning of cervical and craniofacial data: assessing precision, accuracy, and user experience
Journal Article

Comparative evaluation of Artec Leo hand-held scanner and iPad Pro for 3D scanning of cervical and craniofacial data: assessing precision, accuracy, and user experience

2024
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Aim This study compares the precision, accuracy, and user experience of 3D body surface scanning of human subjects using the Artec Leo hand-held scanner and the iPad Pro as 3D scanning devices for capturing cervical and craniofacial data. The investigation includes assessing methods for correcting 'dropped head syndrome' during scanning, to demonstrate the ability of the scanner to be used to reconstruct body surface of patients. Methods Eighteen volunteers with no prior history of neck weakness were scanned three times in three different positions, using the two different devices. Surface area, scanning time, and participant comfort scores were evaluated for both devices. Precision and accuracy were assessed using Mean Absolute Deviation (MAD), Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE), and Intra-Class Correlation Coefficients (ICC). Results Surface area comparisons revealed no significant differences between devices and positions. Scanning times showed no significant difference between devices or positions. Comfort scores varied across positions. MAD analysis identified chin to chest measurements as having the highest variance, especially in scanning position 3. However, no statistical differences were found. MAPE results confirmed accuracy below 5% error for both devices. ICC scores indicated good reliability for both measurement methods, particularly for chin to chest measurements in positions 1 and 3. Conclusion The iPad Pro using the Qlone app demonstrates a viable alternative to the Artec Leo, particularly for capturing head and neck surface area within a clinical setting. The scanning resolution, with an error margin within ±5%, is consistent with clinically accepted standards for orthosis design, where padding and final fit adjustments allow for bespoke devices that accommodate patient comfort. This study highlights the comparative performance of the iPad, as well as suggests two methods which can be used within clinics to correct head drop for scanning.