Journal Article

Differences in cephalometric measurements: a comparison of digital versus hand-tracing methods

Omur Polat-Ozsoy, Aylin Gokcelik and T. Ufuk Toygar Memikoglu

in The European Journal of Orthodontics

Published on behalf of European Orthodontics Society

Volume 31, issue 3, pages 254-259
Published in print June 2009 | ISSN: 0141-5387
Published online April 2009 | e-ISSN: 1460-2210 | DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjn121
Differences in cephalometric measurements: a comparison of digital versus hand-tracing methods

More Like This

Show all results sharing this subject:

  • Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics

GO

Show Summary Details

Preview

The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of cephalometric measurements using computerized tracing of direct digital radiographs in comparison with hand tracing of digital radiographic printouts. Comparisons were made between methods in terms of accuracy of individual measurements as well as evaluation of treatment outcomes. Pre- (T1) and post- (T2) treatment cephalometric digital radiographs of 30 patients were traced using the Vistadent OC 1.1 computer software program (group 1) and manually (group 2) by the same investigator. A total of 26 anatomical landmarks were located and measured. Measurement reproducibility was evaluated by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients, and paired t-tests were used to compare differences in individual measurements and treatment outcomes between methods. Differences greater than 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant.

Significant differences were found between the two methods for SNB, Wits appraisal, Cd–A, Cd–Gn, FMA, SN–PP, U1–NA (mm), U1–FH, L1–NB (mm), and Li–E plane. No significant differences were found between the two methods in the measurement of treatment changes. Cephalometric measurements of most parameters were reproducible for both methods. Despite some discrepancies in measured values between hand-tracing and the computerized method, any differences were minimal and clinically acceptable.

Journal Article.  3060 words.  Illustrated.

Subjects: Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics

Full text: subscription required

How to subscribe Recommend to my Librarian

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.