Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2012 Jan;41(1):11-7. doi: 10.1259/dmfr/37010910.

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

Author information

1
Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Abstract

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 (r²). 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 r² (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.

PMID:
22184624
PMCID:
PMC3520271
DOI:
10.1259/dmfr/37010910
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Atypon Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center