Re: CAD CAM survey
Roger Wagner
Description
Collection
Title:
Re: CAD CAM survey
Creator:
Roger Wagner
Date:
4/30/2014
Text:
-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Wagner CPO
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 11:03 AM
To: Roger Wagner CPO
Subject: FW: [OANDP-L] CAD CAM survey
-----Original Message-----
From: Orthotics and Prosthetics List [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>] On Behalf Of Shawna Chow
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2014 1:53 PM
To: <Email Address Redacted> <mailto:<Email Address Redacted>>
Subject: [OANDP-L] CAD CAM survey
I am currently an O and P student at the University of Washington and would like to gather some opinions on CAD systems for a project I am completing this quarter. I am specifically looking at the Ohio Willow Wood system (Omega Tracer) and Provel System. Any information or thoughts would be greatly appreciated! Below are some questions that I have...
1. What do you feel is the optimal use of these CAD CAM systems (e.g. transtibial, TLSO, etc.) and why? I have used CAD-CAM extensively for; AFO's, TLSO, Foot Orthotics, Cranial helmets, Rigid Removable Dressings, Trans-tibial test sockets and Trans-femoral test sockets-by the numbers. The technology works and works well if you know how to use it properly. CAD-CAM is accurate, fast and too easy not to use once you learn how to use the software and how to scan effectively. There is a learning curve, but like everything in O&P, practice and learn from the professionals around you.
2. In what areas do you feel that CAD CAM is not appropriate for use and why? I have been told many times that you can scan everything and every patient. I disagree. Patients with tone/spasticity, I feel you can position the foot and ankle more appropriately by traditional casting methods (scan the plaster model). Scanning trans-tibial patients wearing liners. This may go against the grain, but I see way too many round shaped sockets lacking total contact. The skeletal anatomy of the trans-tibial human limb isn't round. Scanning over the liner you lose the intimate total contact fit we all strive for with our sockets. Scan directly against the skin and do a skin fit test socket (it works).
3. If you have experience with the two systems (Omega Tracer or Provel), what do you see as the pros and cons of these compared to other CAD systems? I have never used Provel. I have experience with Omega Tracer CAD-CAM System. Omega Tracer is very similar to the system I used previously. I think the Omega Tracer software is easier to use and patient movement isn't a problem during the scanning process. You can make your own templates and you can scan directly against the skin. We currently use the older scanner and the reflective dots are kind of a pain. Scanning with Omega Tracer is slower, but it does work well.
4. What is the training/learning process like for these systems (difficult, easy, time consuming, etc)? How well do the manufacturers support this process? Three day course with Omega Tracer and lots of practice. I don't think CAD-CAM is difficult, but it does require a different mindset, because we are accustom to holding plaster models in our hand, and with these systems everything is done in the virtual world. CAD-CAM is just another tool and knowing when and how to use it takes time and practice. My experience with Omega Tracers support staff has been excellent.
5. Do you have any suggestions for how best to implement these systems into use at a medium size clinic (5+ practitioners)? There is a learning curve and expense associated with CAD-CAM, but if you don't except and embrace this technology you will get run over by it and left in the dust by your competition.
6. In what situations (or with what population) do you feel that the benefits (e.g. time savings, reduced material costs, etc) of purchasing a system outweighs the costs? Lease it, if it's an option. Central fab the technical work. The time savings is big and the turnaround time is fast. Materials cost and overhead should work it's self out as you become proficient with the CAD-CAM tools.
7. Can you recommend any resources on this subject (research articles, websites, etc.)? Talk to users if you can find them.
Again, feel free to provide any information that you have on this subject. Thank you!
-Shawna Kelly
Student Prosthetist Orthotist, University of Washington
From: Roger Wagner CPO
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 11:03 AM
To: Roger Wagner CPO
Subject: FW: [OANDP-L] CAD CAM survey
-----Original Message-----
From: Orthotics and Prosthetics List [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>] On Behalf Of Shawna Chow
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2014 1:53 PM
To: <Email Address Redacted> <mailto:<Email Address Redacted>>
Subject: [OANDP-L] CAD CAM survey
I am currently an O and P student at the University of Washington and would like to gather some opinions on CAD systems for a project I am completing this quarter. I am specifically looking at the Ohio Willow Wood system (Omega Tracer) and Provel System. Any information or thoughts would be greatly appreciated! Below are some questions that I have...
1. What do you feel is the optimal use of these CAD CAM systems (e.g. transtibial, TLSO, etc.) and why? I have used CAD-CAM extensively for; AFO's, TLSO, Foot Orthotics, Cranial helmets, Rigid Removable Dressings, Trans-tibial test sockets and Trans-femoral test sockets-by the numbers. The technology works and works well if you know how to use it properly. CAD-CAM is accurate, fast and too easy not to use once you learn how to use the software and how to scan effectively. There is a learning curve, but like everything in O&P, practice and learn from the professionals around you.
2. In what areas do you feel that CAD CAM is not appropriate for use and why? I have been told many times that you can scan everything and every patient. I disagree. Patients with tone/spasticity, I feel you can position the foot and ankle more appropriately by traditional casting methods (scan the plaster model). Scanning trans-tibial patients wearing liners. This may go against the grain, but I see way too many round shaped sockets lacking total contact. The skeletal anatomy of the trans-tibial human limb isn't round. Scanning over the liner you lose the intimate total contact fit we all strive for with our sockets. Scan directly against the skin and do a skin fit test socket (it works).
3. If you have experience with the two systems (Omega Tracer or Provel), what do you see as the pros and cons of these compared to other CAD systems? I have never used Provel. I have experience with Omega Tracer CAD-CAM System. Omega Tracer is very similar to the system I used previously. I think the Omega Tracer software is easier to use and patient movement isn't a problem during the scanning process. You can make your own templates and you can scan directly against the skin. We currently use the older scanner and the reflective dots are kind of a pain. Scanning with Omega Tracer is slower, but it does work well.
4. What is the training/learning process like for these systems (difficult, easy, time consuming, etc)? How well do the manufacturers support this process? Three day course with Omega Tracer and lots of practice. I don't think CAD-CAM is difficult, but it does require a different mindset, because we are accustom to holding plaster models in our hand, and with these systems everything is done in the virtual world. CAD-CAM is just another tool and knowing when and how to use it takes time and practice. My experience with Omega Tracers support staff has been excellent.
5. Do you have any suggestions for how best to implement these systems into use at a medium size clinic (5+ practitioners)? There is a learning curve and expense associated with CAD-CAM, but if you don't except and embrace this technology you will get run over by it and left in the dust by your competition.
6. In what situations (or with what population) do you feel that the benefits (e.g. time savings, reduced material costs, etc) of purchasing a system outweighs the costs? Lease it, if it's an option. Central fab the technical work. The time savings is big and the turnaround time is fast. Materials cost and overhead should work it's self out as you become proficient with the CAD-CAM tools.
7. Can you recommend any resources on this subject (research articles, websites, etc.)? Talk to users if you can find them.
Again, feel free to provide any information that you have on this subject. Thank you!
-Shawna Kelly
Student Prosthetist Orthotist, University of Washington
Citation
Roger Wagner, “Re: CAD CAM survey,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 25, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/236238.
