Hand-Traced versus Digitally Traced Cephalometric Analysis: A Comparative Study

Rabia Naureen Khan, A. Tariq, A. Jan, H. Pasha, F. Ansari
{"title":"Hand-Traced versus Digitally Traced Cephalometric Analysis: A Comparative Study","authors":"Rabia Naureen Khan, A. Tariq, A. Jan, H. Pasha, F. Ansari","doi":"10.37185/lns.1.1.292","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To determine the accuracy of digitally/computer-traced cephalograms compared to hand-traced cephalograms in terms of differences in mean angular and linear cephalometric measurements.Study Design: Observational (cross-sectional comparative).Place and Duration of Study: The study was carried out at the Orthodontics Department of Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry (AFID), Rawalpindi, Pakistan, from June 2020 to December 2020.Materials and Methods: One hundred and twenty patients aged 12 – 24 years undergoing treatment at the department were randomly selected. Cephalograms were recorded by a digital cephalographic system, keeping the distance between film and object at 5 feet and exposure time at 80 KV/0.5 sec. Both hard and soft copies were obtained. Hand tracings were done using the hard copy with a 0.5 mm lead pencil on 0.003-inch matte acetate paper. Digital tracings were performed using the soft copy of the same digital cephalometric system in the Viewbox software version 4.0. Linear and angular measurements were recorded. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 24. Descriptive statistics were calculated. For comparison between two methods, i.e., vs Computerized tracing, an independent sample t-test was applied while the p-value was kept ≤0.05.Results: No statistically significant difference was observed between cephalometric measurements obtained via the two methods for any of the linear or angular measurements.Conclusion: Computerized cephalometric analysis is reliable and time-effective, and its accuracy is comparable to manual analysis. \n ","PeriodicalId":15254,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Biology and Life Science","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Biology and Life Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37185/lns.1.1.292","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To determine the accuracy of digitally/computer-traced cephalograms compared to hand-traced cephalograms in terms of differences in mean angular and linear cephalometric measurements.Study Design: Observational (cross-sectional comparative).Place and Duration of Study: The study was carried out at the Orthodontics Department of Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry (AFID), Rawalpindi, Pakistan, from June 2020 to December 2020.Materials and Methods: One hundred and twenty patients aged 12 – 24 years undergoing treatment at the department were randomly selected. Cephalograms were recorded by a digital cephalographic system, keeping the distance between film and object at 5 feet and exposure time at 80 KV/0.5 sec. Both hard and soft copies were obtained. Hand tracings were done using the hard copy with a 0.5 mm lead pencil on 0.003-inch matte acetate paper. Digital tracings were performed using the soft copy of the same digital cephalometric system in the Viewbox software version 4.0. Linear and angular measurements were recorded. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 24. Descriptive statistics were calculated. For comparison between two methods, i.e., vs Computerized tracing, an independent sample t-test was applied while the p-value was kept ≤0.05.Results: No statistically significant difference was observed between cephalometric measurements obtained via the two methods for any of the linear or angular measurements.Conclusion: Computerized cephalometric analysis is reliable and time-effective, and its accuracy is comparable to manual analysis.  
手描与数字描头测量分析:比较研究
目的:比较数字/计算机追踪的脑电图与手工追踪的脑电图在平均角度和线性脑电图测量值方面的差异,以确定其准确性。研究设计:观察性(横断面比较)。研究地点和时间:该研究于2020年6月至2020年12月在巴基斯坦拉瓦尔品第武装部队牙科研究所(AFID)正畸科进行。材料与方法:随机选取120例12 ~ 24岁在该科接受治疗的患者。通过数字脑成像系统记录脑电图,保持胶片与物体之间的距离为5英尺,曝光时间为80千伏/0.5秒。获得硬拷贝和软拷贝。用0.5毫米的铅笔在0.003英寸的哑光醋酸纸上用硬拷贝进行手描。使用Viewbox软件4.0版本的相同数字头测系统的软拷贝进行数字跟踪。记录线性和角度测量。数据采用SPSS version 24进行分析。进行描述性统计。两种方法的比较,即计算机追踪,采用独立样本t检验,p值保持≤0.05。结果:通过两种方法获得的任何线性或角度测量的头部测量结果之间没有统计学上的显著差异。结论:计算机化头颅测量分析可靠、及时,准确度可与人工分析相媲美。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信