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

Abstract 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 cor...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Samuel D. J. Spears, Thomas Lester, Ryo Torii, Deepak M. Kalaskar
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2024-11-01
Series:3D Printing in Medicine
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s41205-024-00245-8
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850216575907397632
author Samuel D. J. Spears
Thomas Lester
Ryo Torii
Deepak M. Kalaskar
author_facet Samuel D. J. Spears
Thomas Lester
Ryo Torii
Deepak M. Kalaskar
author_sort Samuel D. J. Spears
collection DOAJ
description Abstract 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.
format Article
id doaj-art-dd762c914c564314910a98dbbc783ee8
institution OA Journals
issn 2365-6271
language English
publishDate 2024-11-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series 3D Printing in Medicine
spelling doaj-art-dd762c914c564314910a98dbbc783ee82025-08-20T02:08:15ZengBMC3D Printing in Medicine2365-62712024-11-0110111410.1186/s41205-024-00245-8Comparative evaluation of Artec Leo hand-held scanner and iPad Pro for 3D scanning of cervical and craniofacial data: assessing precision, accuracy, and user experienceSamuel D. J. Spears0Thomas Lester1Ryo Torii2Deepak M. Kalaskar3Division of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College LondonDivision of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College LondonDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University College of LondonDivision of Surgery and Interventional Sciences, University College LondonAbstract 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.https://doi.org/10.1186/s41205-024-00245-83D scanningDropped head syndrome3D designMNDScanning comfortScanning accuracy
spellingShingle Samuel D. J. Spears
Thomas Lester
Ryo Torii
Deepak M. Kalaskar
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
3D Printing in Medicine
3D scanning
Dropped head syndrome
3D design
MND
Scanning comfort
Scanning accuracy
title 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
title_full 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
title_fullStr 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
title_full_unstemmed 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
title_short 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
title_sort 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
topic 3D scanning
Dropped head syndrome
3D design
MND
Scanning comfort
Scanning accuracy
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s41205-024-00245-8
work_keys_str_mv AT samueldjspears comparativeevaluationofartecleohandheldscannerandipadprofor3dscanningofcervicalandcraniofacialdataassessingprecisionaccuracyanduserexperience
AT thomaslester comparativeevaluationofartecleohandheldscannerandipadprofor3dscanningofcervicalandcraniofacialdataassessingprecisionaccuracyanduserexperience
AT ryotorii comparativeevaluationofartecleohandheldscannerandipadprofor3dscanningofcervicalandcraniofacialdataassessingprecisionaccuracyanduserexperience
AT deepakmkalaskar comparativeevaluationofartecleohandheldscannerandipadprofor3dscanningofcervicalandcraniofacialdataassessingprecisionaccuracyanduserexperience