Literature DB >> 26330904

Reproducibility and speed of landmarking process in cephalometric analysis using two input devices: mouse-driven cursor versus pen.

Alice Cutrera1, Ersilia Barbato2, Francesco Maiorana3, Daniela Giordano3, Rosalia Leonardi4.   

Abstract

AIMS: To define if the new portable appliances, like smartphone, iPad, small laptop and tablet can be used in cephalometric tracing without dropping out the validity of any measurement.
METHODS: We investigated and compared the reproducibility and the speed of landmarks identification process on lateral X-rays in two input devices: a mouse-driven cursor and a pen used as input means in mobile devices. One expert located 22 landmarks on 15 lateral X-rays in a repeated measure design two times, at time T1 and T2, after at least one month. The Intraclass Correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the reproducibility for each landmark tracing and the agreement between the value derived from both input devices. Also, the mean errors in measurements, the standard deviation and the Friedman Test significans (P < 0.05) between both input were statistically evaluated.
RESULTS: All landmarks had a high agreement and the Friedman Test indicated statistically significant differences (P<0.05) for the identification of Na, Po, Pt, PNS, Ba, Pg, Gn, UIE, UIA, APOcc and PPOcc landmarks.
CONCLUSIONS: Even if the mouse input give higher agreement for landmark tracing the differences are really minimal and they can be ignored in private practice. We suggest the adequacy of pen input in clinical setting.

Entities:  

Keywords:  computed aided cephalometric landmark tracing; intraexaminer reliability; landmark identification errors; lateral cephalometry

Year:  2015        PMID: 26330904      PMCID: PMC4525102     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Stomatol (Roma)        ISSN: 1824-0852


  16 in total

1.  Potpourri II.

Authors:  M Abelson
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 2.650

2.  Accuracy of computerized automatic identification of cephalometric landmarks.

Authors:  J K Liu; Y T Chen; K S Cheng
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 2.650

3.  Comparison of landmark identification in traditional versus computer-aided digital cephalometry.

Authors:  Y J Chen; S K Chen; H F Chang; K C Chen
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 2.079

4.  Interactive online program to improve cephalometric tracing skills.

Authors:  Rosalia Leonardi; Daniela Giordano; Mario Caltabiano
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 2.650

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

Authors:  S F Albarakati; K S Kula; A A Ghoneima
Journal:  Dentomaxillofac Radiol       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.419

6.  Reliability of four different computerized cephalometric analysis programs.

Authors:  Mustafa Erkan; Hakan Gurcan Gurel; Metin Nur; Baris Demirel
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2011-04-18       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Accuracy of landmark identification on postero-anterior cephalograms.

Authors:  Edoardo Sicurezza; Mariagrazia Greco; Daniela Giordano; Francesco Maiorana; Rosalia Leonardi
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2012-02-10       Impact factor: 2.750

8.  Differences in cephalometric measurements: a comparison of digital versus hand-tracing methods.

Authors:  Omur Polat-Ozsoy; Aylin Gokcelik; T Ufuk Toygar Memikoglu
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2009-04-06       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  Landmark identification error in posterior anterior cephalometrics.

Authors:  P W Major; D E Johnson; K L Hesse; K E Glover
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 2.079

10.  An evaluation of cellular neural networks for the automatic identification of cephalometric landmarks on digital images.

Authors:  Rosalia Leonardi; Daniela Giordano; Francesco Maiorana
Journal:  J Biomed Biotechnol       Date:  2009-09-10
View more
  1 in total

1.  Comparative Evaluation of Conventional and OnyxCeph™ Dental Software Measurements on Cephalometric Radiography.

Authors:  Elif İzgi; Filiz Namdar Pekiner
Journal:  Turk J Orthod       Date:  2019-06-01
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.