Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

Thoughts on Structure.io and Isense scanners

Discussion in 'General Issues and Discussion Forum' started by joejared, Jul 24, 2015.

  1. joejared

    joejared Active Member


    Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
    Normally, I'm very picky about scanner data, in particular those scanners that should really be used for scanning paper, not feet. This particular scanning technology not only works well, but also gives the practitioner the option to mark areas of the foot in need of special treatment. It also allows the practitioner to cast their patient the way they want to instead of forcing them to potentially compromise on casting methods.

    Where I see a problem is in over thinking calibration, and labs requiring monthly fees for calibration purposes. The calibration utility that is freely available from the App store is adequate, and only necessary the first time the unit is installed, and only to calibrate the ipad's camera to the infrared sensor. Scanning errors will occur if the mount drifts from its position relative to the tablet, but only in terms of the 'skin' when the color option is used. In fact, I found both units I purchased recently to be sufficient, out of the box, requiring nothing other than to run the calibrate utility from Occipital.

    As for those 'fees', in my opinion, they are artificially generated to create a false sense of dependency for special services beyond what Occipital freely provides. In my own network, the data passes through automatically to the labs without interference and without click charges. In our network, we also use Meshlab, which is both free and a multi-platform application 100% compatible Wavefront Object format.

    Where I see the current scanning apps fail will be covered in a freeware app I'll be developing shortly, in particular in the area of ergonomics and lab communications ( proper placement of the scan button, Prescription forms and cc's for special orders). In many ways, these scanners are superior to my own, and while I will still profit on the tail end in manufacturing in terms of royalties, this product stands on its own merit and doesn't need 'special' calibration requiring monthly fees. On the positive, what it will do is provide more options to practitioners to vote with their feet in favor of better quality and service.
     
Loading...

Share This Page