Effect of chin position on natural head orientation reproducibility

Ahangar-Atashi, Mohammad-Hosein; Kachoei, Mojgan

doi:10.4317/medoral.16.e317

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 16 publications

(30 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36] Reorientation of radiographs according to standardized photographs made at the NHP is a reliable and objective method to standardize the radiographs at the NHP for cephalometric analysis. 42,43 NHP, a long proposed modification, yet not fully into practice, can be an 'ideal' reference for us to improve our cephalometric interpretation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of Reproducibility of Natural Head Position using Two Methods

Khan

Rajesh²,

Dinesh³

et al. 2012

The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lateral cephalometric radiographs have become virtually indispensable to orthodontists in the treatment of patients. They are important in orthodontic growth analysis, diagnosis, treatment planning, monitoring of therapy and evaluation of final treatment outcome. Aim:The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the maximum reproducibility with minimum variation of natural head position using two methods, i.e. the mirror method and the fluid level device method. Materials and methods:The study included two sets of 40 lateral cephalograms taken using two methods of obtaining natural head position: (1) The mirror method and (2) fluid level device method, with a time interval of 2 months. Inclusion criteria• Subjects were randomly selected aged between 18 to 26 years Exclusion criteria• History of orthodontic treatment • Any history of respiratory tract problem or chronic mouth breathing • Any congenital deformity • History of traumatically-induced deformity • History of myofacial pain syndrome • Any previous history of head and neck surgery. Results:The result showed that both the methods for obtaining natural head position-the mirror method and fluid level device method were comparable, but maximum reproducibility was more with the fluid level device as shown by the Dahlberg's coefficient and Bland-Altman plot. The minimum variance was seen with the fluid level device method as shown by Precision and Pearson correlation. Conclusion:The mirror method and the fluid level device method used for obtaining natural head position were comparable without any significance, and the fluid level device method was more reproducible and showed less variance when compared to mirror method for obtaining natural head position.Clinical significance: Fluid level device method was more reproducible and shows less variance when compared to mirror method for obtaining natural head position.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…43 Various techniques have been used to establish and transfer head orientation to radiographs. To mention a few, Schmidth made use of a frame that encircled the skull, a plumb line and a protractor.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Reproducibility of Natural Head Position using Two Methods

Khan

Rajesh²,

Dinesh³

et al. 2012

The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…38 Another study found that natural head orientation could be created with great reproducibility through orientation of profile images in different chin positions. 40 They found that although NHO may be influenced by Class II and Class III patients, this influence is not clinically significant. 40…”

Section: Relationship Of Natural Head Position To Craniofacial Morphomentioning

confidence: 95%

“…40 They found that although NHO may be influenced by Class II and Class III patients, this influence is not clinically significant. 40…”

Section: Relationship Of Natural Head Position To Craniofacial Morphomentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Facial Planes as Landmarks for Diagnosis and Treatment Planning

Tomblyn¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives: Diagnosing and treatment planning in contemporary orthodontics is based on comparing elements of craniofacial morphology to selected reference planes. Ideally, a valid reference plane should have good intra-individual reproducibility, low inter-individual variability, and good reliability. The aim of this study was to determine 1.) the reliability and reproducibility of FALL and Glabella Vertical as reference planes 2.) if Glabella Vertical can be used as a frontal reference plane and 3.) if NHO is affected by varying chin positions. Methods: Part 1) 3 judges measured 4 variables (F, FC, G, and GC) on 23 subjects at T1 and T2. Part 2) 105 lateral cephalograms were traced and measured to find the location of GALL to glabella. Part 3) 26 judges (13 orthodontists and 13 non-orthodontists) determined NHO in 3 chin positions (class I, class II, and class III). Results: Part 1) There were significant differences between mean levels of measurements between raters. The inter-rater reliability coefficient was moderate-good at T1 and T2 and the intra-rater reliability coefficient was good between T1 and T2. Part 2) GALL was not always located at glabella. Part 3) There were significant differences between angle means at class I, II and III. Tukey Kramer showed differences between class II and III but not between class I and II and class I and III. There were no differences in NHO between males and females or orthodontists vs non-orthodontists. Conclusion: FALL and Glabella Vertical are reliable and reproducible reference planes. Glabella Vertical can be used as a frontal plane for diagnosis and treatment planning. Judging NHO is under the influence of AP chin position; however, this influence is not clinically significant.

show abstract