↓ Skip to main content

Utilizing a low-cost desktop 3D printer to develop a “one-stop 3D printing lab” for oral and maxillofacial surgery and dentistry fields

Overview of attention for article published in 3D Printing in Medicine, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#7 of 111)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Utilizing a low-cost desktop 3D printer to develop a “one-stop 3D printing lab” for oral and maxillofacial surgery and dentistry fields
Published in
3D Printing in Medicine, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s41205-018-0028-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Takashi Kamio, Kamichika Hayashi, Takeshi Onda, Takashi Takaki, Takahiko Shibahara, Takashi Yakushiji, Takeo Shibui, Hiroshi Kato

Abstract

In the oral and maxillofacial surgery and dentistry fields, the use of three-dimensional (3D) patient-specific organ models is increasing, which has increased the cost of obtaining them. We developed an environment in our facility in which we can design, fabricate, and use 3D models called the "One-stop 3D printing lab". The lab made it possible to quickly and inexpensively produce the 3D models that are indispensable for oral and maxillofacial surgery. We report our 3D model fabrication environment after determining the dimensional accuracy of the models with different laminating pitches (; layer thickness) after fabricating over 300 3D models. Considerations were made for further reducing modeling cost and model print time. MDCT imaging was performed using a dry human mandible, and 3D CAD data were generated from the DICOM image data. 3D models were fabricated with a fused deposition modeling (FDM) 3D printer MF-2000 (MUTOH) with a laminating pitch of 0.2 mm, 0.3 mm, 0.4 mm, or 0.5 mm. Each 3D model was then subjected to reverse scanning to evaluate the modeling conditions and deformation during modeling. For the 3D image processing system, Volume Extractor 3.0 (i-Plants Systems) and POLYGONALmeister V2 (UEL) were used. For the comparative evaluation of CAD data, spGauge 2014.1 (Armonicos) was used. As the laminating pitch increased, the weight of the 3D model, model print time, and material cost decreased, and no significant reduction in geometric accuracy was observed. The amount of modeling material used and preparation cost were reduced by increasing the laminating pitch. The "One-stop 3D printing lab" made it possible to produce 3D models daily. The use of 3D models in the oral and maxillofacial surgery and dentistry fields will likely increase, and we expect that low-cost FDM 3D printers that can produce low-cost 3D models will play a significant role.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 103 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 6 6%
Other 27 26%
Unknown 31 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 35%
Engineering 11 11%
Computer Science 3 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 35 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 November 2020.
All research outputs
#2,249,344
of 23,100,534 outputs
Outputs from 3D Printing in Medicine
#7
of 111 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,367
of 330,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age from 3D Printing in Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,100,534 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 111 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,840 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them