15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Evaluation of speed, repeatability, and reproducibility of digital radiography with manual versus computer-assisted cephalometric analyses.

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The aims of this study were to evaluate intra-examiner repeatability and inter-examiner reproducibility of landmarks using two cephalometric analysing techniques, manual and computerized, and to compare these for speed. One hundred lateral cephalometric radiographs were randomly selected and 11 angular and six linear parameters were traced and measured by two examiners using the manual method and Dolphin Image Software 9.0 on each radiograph. A Student's t-test for paired and independent samples was used to compare the mean values of intra- and inter-examiner differences. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to determine intra- and inter-examiner correlation (r value). Both operators were generally consistent in the repeated measurements; however, for one examiner, the differences for Na is perpendicular to A (P < 0.001), Na is perpendicular Pog, and U1-NA (P < 0.01) distance measurements were found to be statistically significant. Intra-examiner repeatability of landmarks both with the manual and Dolphin techniques showed high correlation coefficients. While inter-examiner reproducibility of landmarks was unacceptable, measurement errors with the manual technique were generally comparable with the Dolphin technique. The mean tracing times of the two operators for a single tracing was 2 minutes 41 seconds for Dolphin and 6 minutes 51 seconds for manual tracings. Computer-assisted cephalometric analysis does not increase intra- and inter-examiner reliability but can result in time saving.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Eur J Orthod
          European journal of orthodontics
          Oxford University Press (OUP)
          1460-2210
          0141-5387
          Oct 2009
          : 31
          : 5
          Affiliations
          [1 ] Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey. tancanuysal@yahoo.com
          Article
          cjp022
          10.1093/ejo/cjp022
          19443692
          de296212-3c0a-4c04-b503-546fcec73cd7
          History

          Comments

          Comment on this article