Mohammed Umar Farooq1, Mohd Asadullah Khan2, Shahid Imran3, Ayesha Sameera4, Arshad Qureshi5, Syed Afroz Ahmed6, Sujan Kumar2, Mohd Aziz Ur Rahman7. 1. Senior Lecturer, Department of Orthodontics, MNR Dental College and Hospital , Sangareddy, Telangana, India . 2. Reader, Department of Orthodontics, MNR Dental College and Hospital , Sangareddy, Telangana, India . 3. Postgraduate Student, Department of Oral Medicine & Radiology, MNR Dental College and Hospital , Sangareddy, Telangana, India . 4. Consulting Oral Pathologist, SVS Diagnostic Centre , Chandanagar, Hyderabad, Telangana, India . 5. Postgraduate Student, Department of Orthodontics, Sri Sai College of Dental Sciences , Vikarabada, Telangana, India . 6. Head of Department and Professor, Department of Oral Pathology, Sri Sai College of Dental Sciences , Vikarabada, Telangana, India . 7. Consulting Endodontist, Life Prime Dental Hospital , Hyderabad, Telangana, India .
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: For more than seven decades orthodontist used cephalometric analysis as one of the main diagnostic tools which can be performed manually or by software. The use of computers in treatment planning is expected to avoid errors and make it less time consuming with effective evaluation and high reproducibility. AIM: This study was done to evaluate and compare the accuracy and reliability of cephalometric measurements between computerized method of direct digital radiographs and conventional tracing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Digital and conventional hand tracing cephalometric analysis of 50 patients were done. Thirty anatomical landmarks were defined on each radiograph by a single investi-gator, 5 skeletal analysis (Steiner, Wits, Tweeds, McNamara, Rakosi Jarabaks) and 28 variables were calculated. RESULTS: The variables showed consistency between the two methods except for 1-NA, Y-axis and interincisal angle measurements which were higher in manual tracing and higher facial axis angle in digital tracing. CONCLUSION: Most of the commonly used measurements were accurate except some measurements between the digital tracing with FACAD® and manual methods. The advantages of digital imaging such as enhancement, transmission, archiving and low radiation dosages makes it to be preferred over conventional method in daily use.
INTRODUCTION: For more than seven decades orthodontist used cephalometric analysis as one of the main diagnostic tools which can be performed manually or by software. The use of computers in treatment planning is expected to avoid errors and make it less time consuming with effective evaluation and high reproducibility. AIM: This study was done to evaluate and compare the accuracy and reliability of cephalometric measurements between computerized method of direct digital radiographs and conventional tracing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Digital and conventional hand tracing cephalometric analysis of 50 patients were done. Thirty anatomical landmarks were defined on each radiograph by a single investi-gator, 5 skeletal analysis (Steiner, Wits, Tweeds, McNamara, Rakosi Jarabaks) and 28 variables were calculated. RESULTS: The variables showed consistency between the two methods except for 1-NA, Y-axis and interincisal angle measurements which were higher in manual tracing and higher facial axis angle in digital tracing. CONCLUSION: Most of the commonly used measurements were accurate except some measurements between the digital tracing with FACAD® and manual methods. The advantages of digital imaging such as enhancement, transmission, archiving and low radiation dosages makes it to be preferred over conventional method in daily use.