Cosmin Ifrim

Dr. Cosmin Ifrim


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

3Years (2024-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 August 2024 in Journal of Clinical Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MMManuela-Maria Manziuc
Manuela-Maria Manziuc
MSMara Mihaela Savu
Mara Mihaela Savu
Oana AlmasanOana Almasan
Oana Almasan
DLDaniel Corneliu Leucuta
Daniel Corneliu Leucuta
MTManuela Taut
Manuela Taut
Smaranda BuduruSmaranda Buduru
Smaranda Buduru
Background: As the demand for digital dentistry constantly increases, digital devices are gradually replacing conventional methods of recording occlusal contacts. The study aimed to assess the inter-rater reliability of occlusal contact point detection using 40 μm articulating paper, Medit i700, and OccluSense and to compare the distribution of occlusal contacts using the articulating paper and intraoral scanner. Material and Methods: The study included 25 participants aged 20 to 30 (13 women and 12 men). Photographs of contact points were taken and marked in maximum intercuspal position (MIP), in protrusive and laterotrusive movements, on working and non-working sides using 40 μm articulating paper and digital devices. The Cohen’s Kappa coefficient assessed the inter-rater reliability. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare dependent groups, articulating paper, and Medit i700. Results: The Cohen’s Kappa index showed that almost perfect agreement was achieved with 40 μm articulating paper. Compared to Medit i700, the 40 μm articulating paper showed an increased mean number of contacts per tooth, except for the third molars. Conclusions: The 40 μm articulating paper has detected more overall contacts than the digital devices, particularly in the posterior areas. An ideal method for registering occlusal contacts has not been established yet.

30 September 2026 in Journal of Clinical Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MMManuela Maria Manziuc
Manuela Maria Manziuc
MSMara Mihaela Savu
Mara Mihaela Savu
FGFlavia Alexandra Groza
Flavia Alexandra Groza
Stefan Cristian VesaStefan Cristian Vesa
Stefan Cristian Vesa
CICosmin Ifrim
Cosmin Ifrim
Smaranda BuduruSmaranda Buduru
Smaranda Buduru
Recent advances in digital dentistry have transformed occlusal analysis through the introduction of new digital workflows for recording static and dynamic occlusal contacts. This clinical study aimed to evaluate the reliability and concordance of two digital clinical workflows, the Medit i700 intraoral scanner and the Tizian JMA-Optic jaw-tracking system, using 100 μm articulating paper as the reference comparator for static and dynamic occlusal-contact recordings. Materials and Methods: Twenty-six participants aged 20 to 25 years were included in this study. For each participant, static and dynamic occlusal contacts were recorded in maximum intercuspation position (MIP), protrusive, and right and left laterotrusive movements, using 100 μm articulating paper, Medit i700, and Tizian JMA-Optic system. Intra-rater reliability was assessed using ICC(A,1) for the quantitative number of MIP contacts and Cohen’s kappa for dynamic occlusal-contact recordings. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the digital systems were evaluated relative to the articulating-paper reference comparator. Agreement between articulating paper and the two digital workflows was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient for the quantitative variables. Results: Intra-rater reliability was generally high but varied according to the recording method and occlusal-contact category. Overall, the Medit i700 showed numerically higher sensitivity and positive predictive value point estimates in several dynamic occlusal-contact categories than Tizian JMA-Optic, while specificity and negative predictive values were generally high for both systems. Both digital workflows showed good overall agreement with articulating paper in recording the number of occlusal contacts in MIP. Agreement was good at arch level, poor in the anterior regions, and moderate in the posterior regions. Conclusions: Both digital workflows showed generally high intra-rater reliability for dynamic occlusal recordings, with reliability varying according to the occlusal-contact category. Both systems demonstrated good agreement with the articulating-paper reference comparator for quantifying occlusal contacts in MIP, although substantial differences in measured contact area were observed. The numerical differences between Medit i700 and Tizian JMA-Optic should be interpreted descriptively rather than as evidence of superiority of either workflow. Although the digital systems provide valuable quantitative information for occlusal analysis, articulating paper remains a widely used conventional method for clinical identification of occlusal contacts and served as the reference comparator in the present study.