Instantaneous Three-Dimensional Scanning for Foot Orthosis Design: Clinical Validation of a Multicamera Photogrammetry 3D Scanner
Taylor, J. A.; Terrill, A. J.; Wholohan, A.; Nightingale, R.; Nagle, O.; Pickering, E. I. M.; Holmes, D.; Powell, S. K.; Woodruff, M. A.
Show abstract
3D scanners have revolutionised how podiatrists capture foot morphology in order to design custom orthoses (insoles). While various 3D scanning technologies are used in clinical practice, they vary greatly in cost and ease of use and many of these are not specifically designed for podiatry applications. There is limited literature comparing accuracy between scanners, and many approaches require prolonged scan times during which the patient must remain still. Multicamera photogrammetry offers a promising solution by enabling high-quality, rapid 3D scanning which other devices cannot provide. This study compared the accuracy and clinical utility of four 3D scanners. One was a high accuracy reference scanner (Artec Spider) which was used as a gold standard. Two further scanners which are commonly used in the clinic were also investigated (Apple iPad 6 with Structure Sensor attachment 'iPad', and Envisic VeriScan Podiatric Scanner 'laser') and these were directly compared with a novel prototype multicamera photogrammetry 3D scanner. The left feet of 20 healthy volunteers were scanned using each of the four devices and scans were evaluated for accuracy, completeness, and acquisition and processing times. All scanners produced clinically acceptable scans, with the novel photogrammetry scanner demonstrating superior accuracy. Scan times varied significantly between scanners, with the photogrammetry device capturing scans much faster. All scanners had acceptable levels of completeness, though the iPad and photogrammetry outperformed the laser scanner. These results provide a valuable tool for clinics seeking guidance on scanner selection and highlight the benefits of instantaneous photogrammetry scanning to improve workflow efficiency and accessibility.
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.