The reliability and reproducibility of cephalometric measurements: a comparison of conventional and digital methods

被引:57
|
作者
AlBarakati, S. F. [2 ]
Kula, K. S. [1 ]
Ghoneima, A. A. [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Indiana Univ, Dept Orthodont & Oral Facial Genet, Sch Dent, Indianapolis, IN 46202 USA
[2] King Saud Univ, Dept Orthodont, Coll Dent, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
[3] Al Azhar Univ, Fac Med Dent, Dept Orthodont, Cairo, Egypt
关键词
cephalometry; radiography; reproducibility of results; RADIOGRAPHS; ACCURACY; IMAGES; PREDICTION; LANDMARKS; ERRORS; ANALOG; FILM;
D O I
10.1259/dmfr/37010910
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the reliability and reproducibility of angular and linear measurements of conventional and digital cephalometric methods. Methods: A total of 13 landmarks and 16 skeletal and dental parameters were defined and measured on pre-treatment cephalometric radiographs of 30 patients. The conventional and digital tracings and measurements were performed twice by the same examiner with a 6 week interval between measurements. The reliability within the method was determined using Pearson's correlation coefficient (r(2)). The reproducibility between methods was calculated by paired t-test. The level of statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Results: All measurements for each method were above 0.90 r(2) (strong correlation) except maxillary length, which had a correlation of 0.82 for conventional tracing. Significant differences between the two methods were observed in most angular and linear measurements except for ANB angle (p = 0.5), angle of convexity (p = 0.09), anterior cranial base (p = 0.3) and the lower anterior facial height (p = 0.6). Conclusion: In general, both methods of conventional and digital cephalometric analysis are highly reliable. Although the reproducibility of the two methods showed some statistically significant differences, most differences were not clinically significant. Dentomaxillofacial Radiology (2012) 41, 11-17. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/37010910
引用
收藏
页码:11 / 17
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Evaluation of the Reliability, Reproducibility and Validity of Digital Orthodontic Measurements Based on Various Digital Models among Young Patients
    Park, Seo-Hyun
    Byun, Soo-Hwan
    Oh, So-Hee
    Lee, Hye-Lim
    Kim, Ju-Won
    Yang, Byoung-Eun
    Park, In-Young
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2020, 9 (09) : 1 - 11
  • [42] The reliability of 3D computer-generated cephalometric measurements: A comparison with direct and CT-scan measurements
    Kusnoto, B
    Evans, CA
    GROWTH MODIFICATION: WHAT WORKS, WHAT DOESN'T, AND WHY, 1999, 35 : 229 - 246
  • [43] Reliability, precision or reproducibility of the measurements. Methods of assessment, utility and applications in clinical practice
    Manterola, Carlos
    Grande, Luis
    Otzen, Tamara
    Garcia, Nayely
    Salazar, Paulina
    Quiroz, Guissea
    REVISTA CHILENA DE INFECTOLOGIA, 2018, 35 (06): : 680 - 688
  • [44] Comparative Analysis of the Discrepancy in Conventional Cephalometric Tracing and Digital Cephalometric Tracing with Planmeca Romexis® Software
    Torres, Pamela Chinchilla
    Pacheco, Maria Jose Rodriguez
    Herrera, Ramon Chinchilla
    ODOVTOS INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DENTAL SCIENCES, 2024, 26 (03) : 236 - 243
  • [45] A COMPARISON OF THE MARGINAL FIT OF CROWNS FABRICATED WITH DIGITAL AND CONVENTIONAL METHODS
    Ng, Jonathan
    Ruse, Dorin
    Wyatt, Chris
    JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 2014, 112 (03): : 555 - 560
  • [46] Comparison of anthropometric and cephalometric measurements of the adult face
    Farkas, LG
    Tompson, B
    Phillips, JH
    Katic, MJ
    Cornfoot, ML
    JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY, 1999, 10 (01) : 18 - 25
  • [47] Reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks on posteroanterior digital radiographs using DICOM and JPEG formats
    Saez, Daniel Martinez
    Bommarito, Silvana
    Sannomiya, Eduardo Kazuo
    ORAL RADIOLOGY, 2016, 32 (02) : 79 - 86
  • [48] Comparison of the Accuracy of Manual and Digital Cephalometric Prediction Methods in Orthognathic Surgical Planning: A Pilot Study
    Arslan, Can
    Altug, Ayse Tuba
    Memikoglu, Tulin Ufuk Toygar
    Arslan, Elif Merve
    Baspinar, Ensar
    TURKISH JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS, 2018, 31 (04) : 133 - 138
  • [49] Comparison of popular sagittal cephalometric analyses for validity and reliability
    Qamaruddin, Irfan
    Alam, Mohammad Khursheed
    Shahid, Fazal
    Tanveer, Sadaf
    Umer, Marvee
    Amin, Erum
    SAUDI DENTAL JOURNAL, 2018, 30 (01) : 43 - 46
  • [50] Reliability and reproducibility issues in DNA microarray measurements
    Draghici, S
    Khatri, P
    Eklund, AC
    Szallasi, Z
    TRENDS IN GENETICS, 2006, 22 (02) : 101 - 109