Comparative analysis of three jaw motion tracking systems: A study on precision and trueness

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the precision and trueness of three jaw motion tracking systems, the KaVo ARCUSdigma system, SDiMatriX system, and Modjaw system, in recording mandibular movements based on optical and ultrasonic principles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-five healthy subjects were selected for the present study to measure protrosive movement and left and right lateral movements using the three jaw motion tracking systems. Each subject's mandibular movement was recorded twice with a 1-week interval. Five parameters-sagittal condylar inclination (SCI) angle, incisal guide angle, Bennett angle, lateral condylar inclination angle, and Fischer's angle-were acquired for further analysis. The precision of the jaw motion tracking systems was evaluated by comparing the results of two measurements of the same parameter. Simultaneously, cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) was utilized during the initial data acquisition and was aligned with intercuspal position (ICP) and edge-to-edge occlusion intraoral scan data. Bone landmarks were used to calculate bilateral SCI as a reference for comparison with the SCI values from each jaw motion tracking system. An independent-sample t-test was conducted to compare parameter differences, with statistical significance set at a p-value below 0.05. RESULTS: There were no significant differences among the three jaw motion tracking systems regarding the corrected values of SCI, incisal guide angle, Bennett angle, lateral condylar inclination angle, and Fischer's angle during the 1-week interval (p > 0.05). The values of bilateral SCI obtained by CBCT were 48.57 ± 6.74 (L) and 48.35 ± 5.28 (R), respectively. No significant differences were found between the reference SCI and those parameters measured by the KaVo ARCUSdigma system and the Modjaw system (p > 0.05), while the results obtained from the SDiMatriX system indicated a significant difference compared to the reference SCI (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The three jaw motion tracking systems exhibited favorable results in terms of precision. Regarding trueness, both the KaVo ARCUSdigma system and the Modjaw system demonstrated a satisfactory levels suitable for applications in digital prosthodontics within clinical settings. However, further refinement is needed to enhance the trueness of the SDiMatriX system.