This article reviews the use of 3D scanners in producing customized orthoses, highlighting the advantages and challenges of various scanning technologies. Traditional plaster casting methods are criticized for their discomfort, hygiene issues, and time-consuming nature. 3D scanners, particularly photogrammetry and structured light, are emerging as more accurate, efficient, and patient-friendly alternatives. Photogrammetry, which uses multiple photographs to create detailed 3D models, is noted for its rapid data acquisition and high-fidelity color and shape reproduction. Structured light scanning, which projects patterned light lines to capture detailed coordinates, is also effective in replicating complex body geometries. Laser and optical scanners are discussed for their specific applications and limitations. The review emphasizes the need for further research to optimize 3D scanning technologies for clinical use, including detailed methodology descriptions and patient-centered outcomes. Despite the promising results, challenges such as equipment costs, training requirements, and software integration remain significant barriers to widespread adoption. The authors conclude that while 3D scanning technology offers significant improvements, more efforts are needed to streamline the orthosis-building process and enhance patient satisfaction.This article reviews the use of 3D scanners in producing customized orthoses, highlighting the advantages and challenges of various scanning technologies. Traditional plaster casting methods are criticized for their discomfort, hygiene issues, and time-consuming nature. 3D scanners, particularly photogrammetry and structured light, are emerging as more accurate, efficient, and patient-friendly alternatives. Photogrammetry, which uses multiple photographs to create detailed 3D models, is noted for its rapid data acquisition and high-fidelity color and shape reproduction. Structured light scanning, which projects patterned light lines to capture detailed coordinates, is also effective in replicating complex body geometries. Laser and optical scanners are discussed for their specific applications and limitations. The review emphasizes the need for further research to optimize 3D scanning technologies for clinical use, including detailed methodology descriptions and patient-centered outcomes. Despite the promising results, challenges such as equipment costs, training requirements, and software integration remain significant barriers to widespread adoption. The authors conclude that while 3D scanning technology offers significant improvements, more efforts are needed to streamline the orthosis-building process and enhance patient satisfaction.