The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of angular and linear cephalometric measurements using a computerized method of direct digital radiographs. This was then compared with the measurements obtained with a computerized method that uses a digitizing pad and hand tracing of printout radiographs. Pre-treatment digital cephalometric radiographs of 125 patients were traced using Vistadent 2.1 AT and Jiffy Orthodontic Evaluation (JOE) software programs and by hand tracing of the printouts. Twenty-six anatomical landmarks were defined on each radiograph by a single investigator and 28 variables were calculated. Statistical analysis was undertaken using one-way analysis of variance and multiple group comparisons using Duncan's test at a significance level of 0.05. Low correlation coefficients indicated poor reproducibility for nasolabial angle for each of the three methods (P > 0.05). Most of the variables showed consistency between the three methods except for nasolabial angle, ANS-Me, APFH, L1-NB, Nperp-Pg, Go-Me, and U1-NA measurements. The findings indicated that most of the cephalometric measurements were highly reproducible with direct digital radiographs using Vistadent 2.1 AT as well as with printouts using both JOE software and hand tracing. Despite the low correlation for some measurements between the Vistadent 2.1 AT, JOE, and hand-tracing methods, most of the commonly used measurements were accurate. The user-friendly and time-saving nature of the computerized method using digital radiographs makes it the preferred option.
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.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.