A Comparison of Conventional and Computerized Cephalometric Methods

Abstract

Aim:The aim of the present study was to compare the conventional method of manual cephalometric analysis with a computerized cephalometric analysis method.Subjects and Method:Lateral cephalometric radiographs of 31 patients (15 males and 16 females) were traced by two methods: (1) conventional; (2) computerized [Nemo Ceph NX 2006 (Nemo Tec, Madrid, Spain)] cephalometric analysis program. Four dental, 7 skeletal, and 3 soft tissue parameters, were measured by one investigator. Intra-class correlation coefficients were performed for both methods to assess the reliability of the measurements according to Houston method. The measurements determined by each method were compared with a paired t-test.Results:The correlation coefficient between the first and second measurements ranged from 0.77 to 0.95 (average: 0.86) for the conventional method and from 0.79 to 0.97 (average: 0.91) for the computerized method. The results of paired t-test showed that significant differences were observed for SNA (°) (P= 0.000), SNB (°) (P= 0.033), ANB (°) (P= 0.037), Witts appraisal (mm) (P= 0.001), FMA (°) (P= 0.026), Overbite (mm) (P= 0.000), U1-PP (°) (P= 0.026), and UL-E (mm) (P= 0.000).Conclusion:Intra-obsserver reliability for both methods was acceptable. Significant differences between conventional and computerized methods were observed for SNA, SNB, ANB, Witts appraisal, FMA, Overbite, U1-PP, and UL-E.

Keywords

• digital imaging
• nemo ceph
• computerized cephalometric program