| Literature DB >> 31516240 |
Manickam Selvamani1, P K Bindiya1, Nandakishore Bhojaraju2, T S Bastian1, H S Suhana1, Melwin Mathew3.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study was to analyze and identify differences in the palatal rugae patterns and genderwise distributions in three different populations (Kerala, Mahe and Puducherry).Entities:
Keywords: Palatal rugae; rugae pattern; study model
Year: 2019 PMID: 31516240 PMCID: PMC6714278 DOI: 10.4103/jomfp.JOMFP_277_18
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Oral Maxillofac Pathol ISSN: 0973-029X
Figure 1Photograph showing palatal rugae
Mean and percentage palatal rugae shape in Puducherry, Mahe and Kerala sample population
| RUGAE SHAPE | PUDUCHERRY | MAHE | KERALA | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total (30) | Incidence | Mean | Incidence | Mean | Incidence | Mean | |
| WAVY | 97 (61) | 3.2 | 84 (57.9) | 2.8 | 66 (42.03) | 2.2 | 247 (53.57) |
| Curved | 22 (13.8) | 0.73 | 25 (17.2) | 0.83 | 37 (23.6) | 1.2 | 84 (18.22) |
| Straight | 17 (10.7) | 0.56 | 19 (13.1) | 0.63 | 27 (17.2) | 0.9 | 63 (13.66) |
| Unification | 14 (8.8) | 0.46 | 11 (7.58) | 0.36 | 15 (9.6) | 0.5 | 40 (8.67) |
| Circular | 3 (1.9) | 0.1 | 1 (0.68) | 0.03 | 2 (1.2) | 0.06 | 6 (1.3) |
| Nonspecific | 6 (3.8) | 0.2 | 5 (3.4) | 0.16 | 10 (6.3) | 0.33 | 21 (4.55) |
| Total | 159 | 145 | 157 | 461 | |||
| Male (10) | |||||||
| Wavy | 39 (60) | 3.9 | 27 (58.7) | 2.7 | 35 (46.6) | 3.5 | 101 (54.3) |
| Curved | 7 (10.8) | 0.7 | 6 (13.04) | 0.6 | 13 (17.3) | 1.3 | 26 (13.97) |
| Straight | 9 (13.8) | 0.9 | 8 (17.39) | 0.8 | 18 (24) | 1.8 | 35 (18.8) |
| Unification | 7 (10.8) | 0.7 | 3 (6.5) | 0.3 | 6 (8) | 0.6 | 16 (8.6) |
| Circular | 1 (1.5) | 0.1 | 1 (2.17) | 0.1 | 0 | 0 | 2 (1) |
| Nonspecific | 2 (3.1) | 0.2 | 1 (2.17) | 0.1 | 3 (4) | 0.3 | 6 (3.2) |
| Total | 65 | 46 | 75 | 186 | |||
| Female (20) | |||||||
| Wavy | 58 (61.7) | 2.9 | 57 (57.57) | 2.85 | 31 (37.8) | 1.55 | 146 (53.09) |
| Curved | 15 (15.95) | 0.75 | 19 (19.19) | 0.95 | 24 (29.26) | 1.2 | 58 (21.09) |
| Straight | 8 (8.5) | 0.4 | 11 (11.11) | 0.55 | 9 (10.97) | 0.45 | 28 (10.18) |
| Unification | 7 (7.4) | 0.35 | 8 (8.08) | 0.4 | 9 (10.97) | 0.45 | 24 (8.72) |
| Circular | 2 (2.1) | 0.1 | 0 | 0 | 2 (2.4) | 0.1 | 4 (1.45) |
| Nonspecific | 4 (4.3) | 0.2 | 4 (4.04) | 0.2 | 7 (8.5) | 0.35 | 15 (5.45) |
| Total | 94 | 99 | 82 | 275 | |||
To further investigate the difference between various rugae pattern Tukey pairwise comparison has been used
| Difference of levels | Difference of means | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Curved- wavy | -1.811 | -14.89 | 0.000 |
| Straight- wavy | -2.044 | -16.81 | 0.000 |
| Unification-wavy | -2.300 | -18.91 | 0.000 |
| Circular-wavy | -2.678 | -22.01 | 0.000 |
| Nonspecific-wavy | -2.511 | -20.64 | 0.000 |
| Straight-curved | -0.233 | -1.92 | 0.391 |
| Unification-curved | -0.489 | -4.02 | 0.001 |
| Circular-curved | -0/867 | -7.12 | 0.000 |
| Nonspecific-curved | -0.700 | -5.75 | 0.000 |
| Unification-straight | -0.256 | -2.10 | 0.287 |
| Circular-straight | -0.633 | -5.21 | 0.000 |
| Nonspecific-straight | -0.467 | -3.84 | 0.002 |
| Circular-unification | -0.378 | -3.11 | 0.023 |
| Nonspecific-unification | -0.211 | -1.74 | 0.508 |
| Nonspecific-circular | 0.167 | 1.37 | 0.745 |
The interrelation between the three character i.e., pattern, gender and region
| Character | ||
|---|---|---|
| Pattern | 48.46 | 0.000* |
| Region | 0.18 | 0.838 |
| Gender | 8.27 | 0.017* |
| Interaction between | ||
| Pattern - region | 1.26 | 0.36 |
| Pattern - gender | 2.41 | 0.11 |
| Region - gender | 1.66 | 0.239 |
R2=96.54%. *P value shows significant at 5% level
To assess whether there is any difference between various characteristics, one-way ANOVA has been performed
| Factor | Mean | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Wavy | 2.744 | 129.13 | 0.0000 |
| Curved | 0.933 | ||
| Straight | 0.700 | ||
| Unification | 0.4444 | ||
| Circular | 0.0667 | ||
| Nonspecific | 0.2333 |
It is clear from the table that there is significant difference between the various characteristics. (F=129.13, P=0.000)