| ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
| Year : 2022 | Volume
: 13
| Issue : 1 | Page : 99-107 |
|
|
Comparative assessment of cephalometric with its analogous photographic variables
Shraddha Gupta, Pradeep Tandon, Gyan P Singh, Dipti Shastri
Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, FODS, KGMU, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Dipti Shastri
Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, FODS, KGMU, Lucknow - 226 003, Uttar Pradesh
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/njms.NJMS_267_20
|
|
|
Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of photographic measurements and compare it with its analogous cephalometric variables.
Materials and Methods: Lateral cephalograms and standardized facial profile photographs were obtained from a sample of 120 subjects (92 females, 28 males; age 12–22 years with mean age of 17.5 years). A total of 4 linear and 7 angular measurements along with 3 ratios analogous to one another were measured on both. Descriptive statistics for all measurements were computed. Pearson's correlation coefficients were computed between analogous measurements, and regression analysis was done for each variable measured on the photograph to accurately predict the cephalometric variable.
Results: The reliability of the standardized photographic technique was satisfactory. Most photographic measurements showed highly significant correlations (P < 0.001) with cephalometric variables. Among all measurements used, the A'N'B' angle was the most effective in explaining the variability of its analogous cephalometric (r2 = 0.35). The Frankfort-mandibular plane angle' angle showed best results for vertical assessment (r2 = 0.81) along with anterior face height (AFH) and lower anterior facial height (r2 = 0.859) and ratio lower posterior facial height/AFH (r2 = 0.702).
Conclusions: Although we cannot rule out lateral cephalogram as the primary record in orthodontics, photographic assessment can always be used through proper standardization, as an alternative diagnostic aid, and also for large-scale epidemiological purposes and places with unavailability of cephalostat.
|
|
|
|
| [FULL TEXT] [PDF]* |
|
 |
|
