Kucukkeles N, Ozkan H, Ari-Demirkaya A, Cilingirturk A M
Faculty of Dentistry, Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey.
J Prosthet Dent. 2005 Aug;94(2):190-4. doi: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.04.025.
There is little known information comparing axiographic data obtained with a mechanical device and data obtained with a computerized device. However, long-term follow-up of patients may necessitate comparison of previously made mechanical axiographic data with records obtained through computer-aided axiography.
The purpose of this study was to compare measurements between mechanical and computerized axiographs in recording the rotational and translation movements of the mandible.
The study enrolled 31 subjects with no detectable clinical signs of temporomandibular disorders. A single operator obtained 3 separate axiographic tracings of right and left condylar paths for each subject, using repeated opening, closing, protrusive, and retrusive movements. Data were collected for both the mechanical (SAM Axiograph Axo 200), and the computerized axiographs (SAM Axiotron and Axo 500). Angular (degrees) and linear measurements (mm) for the mechanical axiograph were made from the tracings obtained on grid paper using a compass, ruler, and protractor. The computer performed the measurements for the computerized axiograph tracings. All parameters were compared statistically with a Wilcoxon signed rank test (alpha = .05). The same operator remeasured all mechanical axiographic tracings for 20 subjects 1 week later to evaluate measurement error. Chronbach's alpha was used as a measure of consistency between the 2 measurements.
Mean opening and closing angles varied between 52.4 and 54.2 degrees, and mean protrusive, and retrusive angles varied between 50.1 and 54.9 degrees. Mean opening and closing distances varied between 11.4 and 12.3 mm, and mean protrusive and retrusive distances varied between 8.2 and 8.7 mm. Comparison with the Wilcoxon signed rank test showed no significant differences for any parameter tested. There were high and medium inter-item correlations between repeated measurements of the manual device when Chronbach's alpha was applied, but these results were not sufficient to prove consistency between 2 consecutive measurements.
The results showed nonsignificant differences between the recordings of the mechanical and computerized axiographs tested. The authors hypothesize that minor differences may be attributed to hand-measuring errors for the tracings generated by the mechanical axiograph. This study is limited due to the impact of poor precision of the manual device on the study results when these recordings are compared to another instrument. Therefore, it is not possible to conclude that data from the manual and the computerized axiographs are compatible with each other.
关于比较通过机械装置获得的轴面记录数据和通过计算机化装置获得的数据，已知信息很少。然而，对患者的长期随访可能需要将先前获得的机械轴面记录数据与通过计算机辅助轴面记录法获得的记录进行比较。
本研究的目的是比较机械轴面描记仪和计算机化轴面描记仪在记录下颌骨旋转和平移运动方面的测量结果。
本研究纳入了31名无颞下颌关节紊乱临床体征的受试者。由一名操作人员对每位受试者的左右髁突路径进行3次单独的轴面描记，采用重复的开口、闭口、前伸和后缩运动。收集了机械轴面描记仪（SAM Axiograph Axo 200）和计算机化轴面描记仪（SAM Axiotron和Axo 500）的数据。机械轴面描记仪的角度（度）和线性测量值（毫米）是使用圆规、直尺和量角器从在方格纸上获得的描记图上测量得到的。计算机对计算机化轴面描记仪的描记图进行测量。所有参数均采用Wilcoxon符号秩检验进行统计学比较（α = 0.05）。1周后，同一名操作人员对20名受试者的所有机械轴面描记图重新进行测量，以评估测量误差。使用Chronbach's α系数作为两次测量之间一致性的指标。
平均开口和闭口角度在52.4度至54.2度之间变化，平均前伸和后缩角度在50.1度至54.9度之间变化。平均开口和闭口距离在11.4毫米至12.毫米之间变化，平均前伸和后缩距离在8.2毫米至8.7毫米之间变化。Wilcoxon符号秩检验的比较结果显示，所测试的任何参数均无显著差异。应用Chronbach's α系数时，手动装置重复测量之间存在高和中度的项目间相关性，但这些结果不足以证明两次连续测量之间的一致性。
结果显示，所测试的机械轴面描记仪和计算机化轴面描记仪的记录之间无显著差异。作者推测，微小差异可能归因于机械轴面描记仪生成的描记图的手工测量误差。当将这些记录与另一仪器进行比较时，由于手动装置精度较差对研究结果的影响，本研究存在局限性。因此，无法得出手动轴面描记仪和计算机化轴面描记仪的数据彼此兼容的结论。
