Facial Landmarks Determination with Different Digital Scanners: An In Vivo Study

<b>Background</b>: The development of facial scanning technology has introduced new methods for facial morphology analysis, progressively shifting from conventional methodology such as direct anthropometry and two-dimensional photography toward three-dimensional digital acquisition. These technologies aim to reduce operator subjectivity, enhance measurement reproducibility, and enable comprehensive facial analysis within digital workflows. <b>Methods</b>: Thirty adult volunteers were recruited and provided informed consent. In each participant, twenty-five predefined facial landmarks were identified and nineteen linear interlandmark distances were recorded using three methods: direct anthropometric measurement with a digital caliper (Mitutoyo<sup>®</sup>, USA), a low-cost portable facial scanner (Revopoint<sup>®</sup>), and a professional static facial scanner (RAYFace<sup>®</sup>). Manual anthropometry was used as a clinical refence standard. All measurements were performed by a single trained operator. Trueness was defined as the absolute difference between the reference measurements and the mean of digital measurements, while precision was defined as the standard deviation of repeated digital measurements. Results were expressed as mean values and 95% confidence intervals. <b>Results</b>: Overall precision was 0.58 (0.53; 0.62) mm for Revopoint<sup>®</sup> and 0.43 (0.39; 0.47) mm for RAYFace<sup>®</sup>, corresponding to precision percentages of 1.19 (1.06; 1.33) % and 0.88 (0.78; 0.97) %, respectively. Mean trueness values were 2.16 (2.01; 2.31) mm and 1.92 (1.80; 2.05) mm for conventional-Revopoint<sup>®</sup> and conventional-RAYFace<sup>®</sup>, corresponding to a trueness impact value of 4.30 (3.87; 4.74) % and 4.08 (3.61; 4.55) %, respectively. Statistically significant differences between scanners were observed for specific landmark locations. <b>Conclusions</b>: Within the methodological limitations of this in vivo study-including the use of manual anthropometry as a reference standard, a single-operator design and a predominantly female sample-both facial scanners demonstrated reproducible linear measurements within clinically acceptable thresholds for prosthodontic and esthetic planning applications. The professional static scanner showed superior accuracy, suggesting greater suitability for complex cases requiring higher precision.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Published
2026-02-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15041500
Primary Topic
Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Facial Landmarks Determination with Different Digital Scanners: An In Vivo Study

Helena Francisco, Ana Catarina Pinto, João Caramês, Rita Vanessa Alves et al.
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
article

Facial Landmarks Determination with Different Digital Scanners: An In Vivo Study

Helena Francisco, Ana Catarina Pinto, João Caramês, Rita Vanessa Alves, Gonçalo Bártolo Caramês
article en

Abstract

<b>Background</b>: The development of facial scanning technology has introduced new methods for facial morphology analysis, progressively shifting from conventional methodology such as direct anthropometry and two-dimensional photography toward three-dimensional digital acquisition. These technologies aim to reduce operator subjectivity, enhance measurement reproducibility, and enable comprehensive facial analysis within digital workflows. <b>Methods</b>: Thirty adult volunteers were recruited and provided informed consent. In each participant, twenty-five predefined facial landmarks were identified and nineteen linear interlandmark distances were recorded using three methods: direct anthropometric measurement with a digital caliper (Mitutoyo<sup>®</sup>, USA), a low-cost portable facial scanner (Revopoint<sup>®</sup>), and a professional static facial scanner (RAYFace<sup>®</sup>). Manual anthropometry was used as a clinical refence standard. All measurements were performed by a single trained operator. Trueness was defined as the absolute difference between the reference measurements and the mean of digital measurements, while precision was defined as the standard deviation of repeated digital measurements. Results were expressed as mean values and 95% confidence intervals. <b>Results</b>: Overall precision was 0.58 (0.53; 0.62) mm for Revopoint<sup>®</sup> and 0.43 (0.39; 0.47) mm for RAYFace<sup>®</sup>, corresponding to precision percentages of 1.19 (1.06; 1.33) % and 0.88 (0.78; 0.97) %, respectively. Mean trueness values were 2.16 (2.01; 2.31) mm and 1.92 (1.80; 2.05) mm for conventional-Revopoint<sup>®</sup> and conventional-RAYFace<sup>®</sup>, corresponding to a trueness impact value of 4.30 (3.87; 4.74) % and 4.08 (3.61; 4.55) %, respectively. Statistically significant differences between scanners were observed for specific landmark locations. <b>Conclusions</b>: Within the methodological limitations of this in vivo study-including the use of manual anthropometry as a reference standard, a single-operator design and a predominantly female sample-both facial scanners demonstrated reproducible linear measurements within clinically acceptable thresholds for prosthodontic and esthetic planning applications. The professional static scanner showed superior accuracy, suggesting greater suitability for complex cases requiring higher precision.

Journal of Clinical MedicineVol. 15(4)
University of Lisbon (PT), Instituto de Implantologia (PT)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 56%
Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.