You Q L, Hägg U
Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Hong Kong.
Eur J Orthod. 1999 Dec;21(6):717-25. doi: 10.1093/ejo/21.6.717.
The purpose of this investigation was to compare the reliability of three superimposition methods: Björk's structural, Ricketts' four-position, and Pancherz's method. The material consisted of 14 pairs of cephalograms obtained before and after Herbst treatment. Each pair of cephalograms were traced and superimposed by means of the three different methods three times each. A reference grid was used to quantitatively evaluate the sagittal dental and skeletal changes. The results revealed that: (1) there was no statistically significant difference between the repeated measurements in the three methods, i.e. all three methods were reliable. (2) There was no significant difference among the three superimposition methods to evaluate the sagittal skeletal and dental changes. (3) Comparing the coefficient of reliability, none of the three methods was suitable for individual assessment, and Pancherz's method only was acceptable for assessment of patients in groups.
比约克(Björk)的结构法、里基茨(Ricketts)的四位置法和潘彻兹(Pancherz)法。材料包括14对在Herbst矫治器治疗前后获得的头影测量片。每对头影测量片分别用三种不同方法进行三次描图和重叠。使用参考网格定量评估矢状向牙齿和骨骼的变化。结果显示:(1)三种方法的重复测量之间无统计学显著差异,即所有三种方法都是可靠的。(2)在评估矢状向骨骼和牙齿变化方面,三种重叠方法之间无显著差异。(3)比较可靠性系数,三种方法均不适用于个体评估,只有潘彻兹法可用于群体患者的评估。