Literature DB >> 18981169

The influence of cephalometrics on orthodontic treatment planning.

Peter G Nijkamp1, Luc L M H Habets, Irene H A Aartman, Andrej Zentner.   

Abstract

Since its introduction, cephalometrics, i.e. cephalometric radiography and analysis, has been used for orthodontic treatment planning. However, the effectiveness of this diagnostic method remains questionable. A randomized crossover study was designed to assess the influence of cephalometrics in orthodontic treatment planning of individual patients. Diagnostic records of 48 subjects (24 males and 24 females aged 11-14 years) were divided in two stratified groups and assigned to one of two combinations: A, dental casts only, and B, dental casts, cephalometric radiographs, and analysis. The records were presented to 10 orthodontic postgraduates and four orthodontists for formulation of orthodontic treatment plans containing a dichotomous decision regarding the use of a functional appliance (FUNC), rapid maxillary expansion (RME), and extraction (EXTR). The combination of FUNC + RME + EXTR was used as the basis of the outcome measure. Agreement on orthodontic treatment planning using all possible comparisons of diagnostic records of individual patients (AB, AA, and BB) was assessed and overall proportions of agreement (OPA) were calculated for orthodontic postgraduates and orthodontists separately. Median OPA were 0.60 (AB), 0.65 (AA), and 0.60 (BB) for orthodontic postgraduates and 0.50 (AB), 0.75 (AA), and 0.50 (BB) for orthodontists. Irrespective of the level of experience, neither consistency of orthodontic treatment planning between both combinations of diagnostic records showed a statistically significant difference (P > 0.05) using Wilcoxon signed rank test nor did consistencies and agreement of orthodontic treatment planning after the addition of cephalometrics. It appears that cephalometrics are not required for orthodontic treatment planning, as they did not influence treatment decisions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18981169     DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjn059

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Orthod        ISSN: 0141-5387            Impact factor:   3.075


  16 in total

1.  The relationship between 3D dentofacial photogrammetry measurements and traditional cephalometric measurements.

Authors:  Jose C Castillo; Grace Gianneschi; Demyana Azer; Amornrut Manosudprasit; Arshan Haghi; Neetu Bansal; Veerasathpurush Allareddy; Mohamed I Masoud
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 2.079

2.  The effect of digital diagnostic setups on orthodontic treatment planning.

Authors:  Derek Hou; Raquel Capote; Burcu Bayirli; Daniel C N Chan; Greg Huang
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 2.650

3.  How orthodontic records can influence torque choice decisions?

Authors:  Dimitrios Mavreas; Enya Kuppens; Ronald Buyl; Bart Vande Vannet
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2015-09-25       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Image-stitching artefacts and distortion in CCD-based cephalograms and their association with sensor type and head movement: ex vivo study.

Authors:  Olesya Svystun; Ann Wenzel; Lars Schropp; Rubens Spin-Neto
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2019-11-18       Impact factor: 2.419

5.  Influence of Lateral Cephalometric Radiography on Treatment Planning and Preferences in Skeletal Open-Bite Patients: Do Lateral Cephalograms Influence Treatment Planning?

Authors:  Irina Stupar; Enver Yetkiner; Thomas Attin; Rengin Attin
Journal:  Turk J Orthod       Date:  2016-12-01

Review 6.  Records needed for orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning: a systematic review.

Authors:  Robine J Rischen; K Hero Breuning; Ewald M Bronkhorst; Anne Marie Kuijpers-Jagtman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-12       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Influence of lateral cephalometric radiographs on extraction decision in skeletal class I patients.

Authors:  Banu Dinçer; Enver Yetkiner; Isil Aras; Thomas Attin; Rengin Attin
Journal:  Head Face Med       Date:  2013-12-04       Impact factor: 2.151

8.  3-Dimensional analysis for class III malocclusion patients with facial asymmetry.

Authors:  Eun-Ja Kim; Eun-Jung Ki; Hae-Myung Cheon; Eun-Joo Choi; Kyung-Hwan Kwon
Journal:  J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2013-08-23

Review 9.  Validity of 2D lateral cephalometry in orthodontics: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ana R Durão; Pisha Pittayapat; Maria Ivete B Rockenbach; Raphael Olszewski; Suk Ng; Afonso P Ferreira; Reinhilde Jacobs
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2013-09-20       Impact factor: 2.750

10.  Correlation Assessment between Three-Dimensional Facial Soft Tissue Scan and Lateral Cephalometric Radiography in Orthodontic Diagnosis.

Authors:  Piero Antonio Zecca; Rosamaria Fastuca; Matteo Beretta; Alberto Caprioglio; Aldo Macchi
Journal:  Int J Dent       Date:  2016-05-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.