Skip Navigation



The European Journal of Orthodontics Advance Access published online on May 14, 2009
The European Journal of Orthodontics, doi:10.1093/ejo/cjp022
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
31/5/523    most recent
cjp022v1
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 Uysal, T.
Right arrow Articles by Yagci, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Uysal, T.
Right arrow Articles by Yagci, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Evaluation of speed, repeatability, and reproducibility of digital radiography with manual versus computer-assisted cephalometric analyses

Tancan Uysal, Asli Baysal and Ahmet Yagci

Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkey

Address for correspondenceDr Tancan Uysal, Erciyes Üniversitesi, Dis Hekimligi Fakültesi, Ortodonti Anabilim Dali, Melikgazi, Kayseri 38039, Turkey, E-mail:tancanuysal{at}yahoo.com


  Abstract

The aims of this study were to evaluate intra-examiner repeatability and inter-examiner reproducibility of landmarks using two cephalometric analysing techniques, manual and computerized, and to compare these for speed. One hundred lateral cephalometric radiographs were randomly selected and 11 angular and six linear parameters were traced and measured by two examiners using the manual method and Dolphin Image Software 9.0 on each radiograph. A Student's t-test for paired and independent samples was used to compare the mean values of intra- and inter-examiner differences. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to determine intra- and inter-examiner correlation (r value).

Both operators were generally consistent in the repeated measurements; however, for one examiner, the differences for NaboxhuA (P < 0.001), NaboxhuPog, and U1–NA (P < 0.01) distance measurements were found to be statistically significant. Intra-examiner repeatability of landmarks both with the manual and Dolphin techniques showed high correlation coefficients. While inter-examiner reproducibility of landmarks was unacceptable, measurement errors with the manual technique were generally comparable with the Dolphin technique. The mean tracing times of the two operators for a single tracing was 2 minutes 41 seconds for Dolphin and 6 minutes 51 seconds for manual tracings. Computer-assisted cephalometric analysis does not increase intra- and inter-examiner reliability but can result in time saving.


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.