The relationship between craniofacial morphology, head posture and spinal curvature in 8, 11 and 15-year-old children

Hellsing, Eva; McWilliam, John; Reigo, T.; Spangfort, E.

doi:10.1093/ejo/9.1.254

Cited by 58 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[4][5][6][8][9][10]12,15,18,32,33 The results of the present study contradict the statements made by Michelotti et al, 7 who could furnish evidence for the correlations between the jaw position and the body posture but not for lower spine sections.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 91%

“…Often, a simple subjective clinical orthopedic examination is carried out [3][4][5][6] to diagnose forms of bad posture. However, some studies used noninvasive orthopedic measurement methods for the analysis of lordotic or kyphotic angles, [14][15][16][17][18] but no examination technique is described in the orthodontic literature based on light-projection methods and further computerized processing of a three-dimensional back surface profile.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Trunk Inclination, Pelvic Tilt and Pelvic Rotation in Relation to the Craniofacial Morphology in Adults

Lippold

Danesh

Hoppe

et al. 2007

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To relate the differences in the posture of patients with different craniofacial morphologies. Subjects and Methods: Fifty-three adult patients with Class II and III malformations were examined by cephalometric analysis and rasterstereography. The facial depth, maxillary position, mandibular plane angle, inner gonial angle, facial axis, and lower facial height were evaluated and classified into a basal distal-mesial group and a horizontal-vertical group by means of threshold parameters. Analyzing the results of the rasterstereography, the spine's lateral perpendicular deviation, the pelvic tilt, and the pelvic rotation were calculated by means of mathematical algorithms on the basis of the three-dimensional spine profile. To determine the statistically significant correlations between the studied parameters, the t-test was applied in groups with a normal distribution, and the Mann-Whitney U-test was used in the cases of abnormally distributed variables (significance level P Ͻ .05). Results: Statistically significant differences (P Ͻ .05) in pelvic torsion were documented with respect to the facial axis and facial depth. Moreover, the differences (P Ͻ .05) between patients with a skeletal horizontal-vertical facial axis and patients with a basal distal-mesial position for the facial depth could be determined for the pelvic torsion. Conclusions: As a clinical consequence of the results, an extension of the interdisciplinary concepts within the sense of an orthopedic examination can be considered for patients undergoing a combined orthodontic-operative therapy.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trunk Inclination, Pelvic Tilt and Pelvic Rotation in Relation to the Craniofacial Morphology in Adults

Lippold

Danesh

Hoppe

et al. 2007

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A previous study found an association between the inclination of the cervical column and fusions of the cervical vertebral bodies (Sonnesen et al, 2007). Furthermore, other previous studies have found an association between the development of craniofacial morphology and posture of the head and neck (Hellsing et al, 1987;Huggare, 1987;Huggare, 1991;Kylämarkula & Huggare, 1985;Marcotte, 1981;Sandikcioglu et al, 1994;Solow & Tallgren, 1976;Solow et al, 1984;Solow & Siersbaek-Nielsen, 1986;Solow & Siersbaek-Nielsen, 1992;Sonnesen et al, 2001). The findings in the present study illustrate that differences in craniofacial morphology between individuals within a pair of MZ twins can be associated with deviations in the cervical column.…”

Section: Figures 2-6supporting

confidence: 78%

“…Furthermore, previous studies have also found an association between the development of craniofacial morphology and posture of the head and neck (Hellsing et al, 1987;Huggare, 1987;Huggare, 1991;Kylämarkula & Huggare, 1985;Marcotte, 1981;Sandikcioglu et al, 1994;Solow & Tallgren, 1976;Solow et al, 1984;Solow & Siersbaek-Nielsen, 1986;Solow & Siersbaek-Nielsen, 1992;Sonnesen et al, 2001). It is possible that fusions of the upper cervical vertebrae influence the posture of the head and neck, and thereby the development of craniofacial morphology and occlusion.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Cervical Column Morphology and Craniofacial Profiles in Monozygotic Twins

Sonnesen¹,

Pallisgaard²,

Kjær

2008

Twin Res Hum Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have described the relationships between cervical column morphology and craniofacial morphology. The aims of the present study were to describe cervical column morphology in 38 pairs of adult monozygotic (MZ) twins, and compare craniofacial morphology in twins with fusions with craniofacial morphology in twins without fusion. Visual assessment of cervical column morphology and cephalometric measurements of craniofacial morphology were performed on profile radiographs. In the cervical column, fusion between corpora of the second and third vertebrae was registered as fusion. In the twin group, 8 twin pairs had fusion of the cervical column in both individuals within the pair (sub-group A), 25 pairs had no fusions (subgroup B), and in 5 pairs, cervical column morphology was different within the pair (subgroup C), as one twin had fusion and the other did not. Comparison of craniofacial profiles showed a tendency to increased jaw retrognathia, larger cranial base angle, and larger mandibular inclination in subgroup A than in subgroup B. The same tendency was observed within subgroup C between the individual twins with fusion compared with those without fusion. These results confirm that cervical fusions and craniofacial morphology may be interrelated in twins when analysed on profile radiographs. The study also documents that differences in cervical column morphology can occur in individuals within a pair of MZ twins. It illustrates that differences in craniofacial morphology between individuals within a pair of MZ twins can be associated with cervical fusion.

show abstract

“…Nachdem das Konzept der nattirlichen Kopfhaltung in den ftinfziger Jahren in die kieferorthop~idische Literatur aufgenommen wurde [3,8,15], spricht man bei der nattirlichen Kopfhaltung vonder wahren Horizontale (,,true horizontal line") und empfiehlt sie als geeignete Bezugslinie bei der kephalometrischen Analyse [1,5,6,10,[22][23][24][25].…”

Section: Pancherz Milat : Gesichtsprofil Und Kopfhaltungunclassified

Beurteilung des Gesichtsprofils in Relation zur Kopfhaltung

Pancherz

Milat

1994

Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On the basis of Schwarz's [21] facial typology, soft tissue facial profile was evaluated in relation to 3 head positions: natural head position, head position according to the Frankfurter Horizontal, and head position according to a subjective personal appraisal of an aesthetically pleasing profile, i.e. aesthetic head position. Forty children (20 girls and 20 boys) and 40 adults (20 women and 20 men) with varying occlusal relationships constituted the study group. Facial photos oriented according to the above 3 head positions were evaluated. The results revealed that head posture had a decisive impact on the outcome of the facial profile evaluation. Significant differences existed between natural head position on the one hand and Frankfurter Horizontal and aesthetic head position on the other. Due to the relatively large methodological error in the registration of natural head position, and the resulting effect of this error on profile evaluation, natural head position can lead to misleading results. The advantage of Frankfurter Horizontal as opposed to aesthetic head position is the result of a subjective appraisal. Thus, when using Schwarz's method in evaluating facial profile, Frankfurter Horizontal still appears to be quite appropriate.

show abstract

The relationship between craniofacial morphology, head posture and spinal curvature in 8, 11 and 15-year-old children

Cited by 58 publications

References 0 publications

Trunk Inclination, Pelvic Tilt and Pelvic Rotation in Relation to the Craniofacial Morphology in Adults

Trunk Inclination, Pelvic Tilt and Pelvic Rotation in Relation to the Craniofacial Morphology in Adults

Cervical Column Morphology and Craniofacial Profiles in Monozygotic Twins

Beurteilung des Gesichtsprofils in Relation zur Kopfhaltung

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About