基于智能手机的应用程序和基于计算机的成像软件进行的头部测量的观察者间和观察者内可靠性:比较研究

IF 0.8 Q4 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Vinay Kumar Chugh, Navleen Kaur Bhatia, Dipti Shastri, Sam Prasanth Shankar, Surjit Singh, Rinkle Sardana
{"title":"基于智能手机的应用程序和基于计算机的成像软件进行的头部测量的观察者间和观察者内可靠性:比较研究","authors":"Vinay Kumar Chugh,&nbsp;Navleen Kaur Bhatia,&nbsp;Dipti Shastri,&nbsp;Sam Prasanth Shankar,&nbsp;Surjit Singh,&nbsp;Rinkle Sardana","doi":"10.4274/TurkJOrthod.2022.2022.60","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim was to compare the reliability of cephalometric analysis using a smartphone-based application with conventional computer-based imaging software.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Pre-treatment cephalometric radiographs of 50 subjects (26 males, 24 females; mean age, 19.2 years; ±4.2) were traced using the OneCeph® application and Dolphin imaging software®. Two independent observers identified seventeen landmarks and measured fourteen cephalometric measurements at an interval of. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability were evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Student's t-test was used to compare the means of two measurement methods for observer 1 and observer 2. Additionally, the time taken to complete the cephalometric measurements was also compared between the two methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Good (ICC 0.75-0.90) to excellent (ICC 0.90-1.00) interobserver and intraobserver reliability was observed for all hard and soft tissue measurements with both methods. No significant differences were found between the two measurement methods for both observers (p<0.05). OneCeph application took significantly more time to complete the analysis than Dolphin imaging software (p<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Cephalometric measurements made through a smartphone-based application showed good to excellent interobserver and intraobserver reliability and are comparable with the computer-based software. Therefore, it can be recommended for clinical use. The time taken to complete the cephalometric measurements was more with a smartphone-based application (OneCeph application) compared to computer-based software (Dolphin imaging software).</p>","PeriodicalId":37013,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Orthodontics","volume":"36 2","pages":"94-100"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/92/4e/tjo-36-94.PMC10318850.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interobserver and Intraobserver Reliability of Cephalometric Measurements Performed on Smartphone-Based Application and Computer-Based Imaging Software: A Comparative Study.\",\"authors\":\"Vinay Kumar Chugh,&nbsp;Navleen Kaur Bhatia,&nbsp;Dipti Shastri,&nbsp;Sam Prasanth Shankar,&nbsp;Surjit Singh,&nbsp;Rinkle Sardana\",\"doi\":\"10.4274/TurkJOrthod.2022.2022.60\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim was to compare the reliability of cephalometric analysis using a smartphone-based application with conventional computer-based imaging software.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Pre-treatment cephalometric radiographs of 50 subjects (26 males, 24 females; mean age, 19.2 years; ±4.2) were traced using the OneCeph® application and Dolphin imaging software®. Two independent observers identified seventeen landmarks and measured fourteen cephalometric measurements at an interval of. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability were evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Student's t-test was used to compare the means of two measurement methods for observer 1 and observer 2. Additionally, the time taken to complete the cephalometric measurements was also compared between the two methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Good (ICC 0.75-0.90) to excellent (ICC 0.90-1.00) interobserver and intraobserver reliability was observed for all hard and soft tissue measurements with both methods. No significant differences were found between the two measurement methods for both observers (p<0.05). OneCeph application took significantly more time to complete the analysis than Dolphin imaging software (p<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Cephalometric measurements made through a smartphone-based application showed good to excellent interobserver and intraobserver reliability and are comparable with the computer-based software. Therefore, it can be recommended for clinical use. The time taken to complete the cephalometric measurements was more with a smartphone-based application (OneCeph application) compared to computer-based software (Dolphin imaging software).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37013,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkish Journal of Orthodontics\",\"volume\":\"36 2\",\"pages\":\"94-100\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/92/4e/tjo-36-94.PMC10318850.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkish Journal of Orthodontics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4274/TurkJOrthod.2022.2022.60\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/TurkJOrthod.2022.2022.60","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:目的是比较使用基于智能手机的应用程序和传统的基于计算机的成像软件进行头颅测量分析的可靠性。方法:50例受试者(男26例,女24例;平均年龄19.2岁;±4.2),使用OneCeph®应用程序和Dolphin成像软件®进行追踪。两个独立的观测者确定了17个地标,并在间隔的时间内测量了14个头侧测量值。使用类内相关系数评估观察者间和观察者内的信度。采用学生t检验比较观察者1和观察者2两种测量方法的均数。此外,还比较了两种方法完成头侧测量所需的时间。结果:两种方法对所有硬组织和软组织测量的观察者间和观察者内信度均为良好(ICC 0.75-0.90)至优异(ICC 0.90-1.00)。结论:通过基于智能手机的应用程序进行的头部测量显示出良好的观察者之间和观察者内部的可靠性,与基于计算机的软件相当。因此,可以推荐临床使用。与基于计算机的软件(Dolphin成像软件)相比,基于智能手机的应用程序(OneCeph应用程序)完成头部测量所需的时间更长。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Interobserver and Intraobserver Reliability of Cephalometric Measurements Performed on Smartphone-Based Application and Computer-Based Imaging Software: A Comparative Study.

Interobserver and Intraobserver Reliability of Cephalometric Measurements Performed on Smartphone-Based Application and Computer-Based Imaging Software: A Comparative Study.

Interobserver and Intraobserver Reliability of Cephalometric Measurements Performed on Smartphone-Based Application and Computer-Based Imaging Software: A Comparative Study.

Interobserver and Intraobserver Reliability of Cephalometric Measurements Performed on Smartphone-Based Application and Computer-Based Imaging Software: A Comparative Study.

Objective: The aim was to compare the reliability of cephalometric analysis using a smartphone-based application with conventional computer-based imaging software.

Methods: Pre-treatment cephalometric radiographs of 50 subjects (26 males, 24 females; mean age, 19.2 years; ±4.2) were traced using the OneCeph® application and Dolphin imaging software®. Two independent observers identified seventeen landmarks and measured fourteen cephalometric measurements at an interval of. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability were evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Student's t-test was used to compare the means of two measurement methods for observer 1 and observer 2. Additionally, the time taken to complete the cephalometric measurements was also compared between the two methods.

Results: Good (ICC 0.75-0.90) to excellent (ICC 0.90-1.00) interobserver and intraobserver reliability was observed for all hard and soft tissue measurements with both methods. No significant differences were found between the two measurement methods for both observers (p<0.05). OneCeph application took significantly more time to complete the analysis than Dolphin imaging software (p<0.001).

Conclusion: Cephalometric measurements made through a smartphone-based application showed good to excellent interobserver and intraobserver reliability and are comparable with the computer-based software. Therefore, it can be recommended for clinical use. The time taken to complete the cephalometric measurements was more with a smartphone-based application (OneCeph application) compared to computer-based software (Dolphin imaging software).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Turkish Journal of Orthodontics
Turkish Journal of Orthodontics Dentistry-Orthodontics
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
9.10%
发文量
34
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信