Skip Navigation

The European Journal of Orthodontics 1995 17(6):483-490; doi:10.1093/ejo/17.6.483
© 1995 by European Orthodontic Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fanibunda, K. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fanibunda, K. B.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Four measurements for assessing facial deformity

K. B. Fanibunda

Department of Oral Surgery, Dental School, University of Newcastle upon Tyne UK

Address for correspondence Mr K. B. Fanibunda Department of Oral Surgery The Dental School University of Newcastle upon Tyne Framlington Place Newcastle upon Tyne NE2 4BW, UK.

Four lateral cephalometric measurements which localize the anterior maxilla and chin in the horizontal and vertical planes are presented and evaluated against three control methods, in a pilot study of 40 patients. It was found that in 27 out of 30 comparisons (90%) the frequency of agreement between the proposed and each of the control methods was greater than the agreement between the control methods themselves. In three out of 30 comparisons (10%) it was found that the frequency of agreement between the proposed and the control methods was the same as between the controls themselves.

In addition, there was a greater agreement reached between methods when measurements were related to the cranial base. In view of the close relationship between cranial and facial development, it was considered that measuring ratios should portray the facial deformity not just in relation to the cranial base but to the individual's own cranial base and not to a population norm. The results also confirm the findings of previous work in the literature which demonstrate disagreement between cephalometric methods for localization of a given landmark.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.