Suppr超能文献

手动描绘图像与相应数字描绘的扫描X光片的比较。

A comparison of manual traced images and corresponding scanned radiographs digitally traced.

作者信息

Naoumova Julia, Lindman Rolf

机构信息

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Jaw Orthopaedics, Malmö University Hospital, Sweden.

出版信息

Eur J Orthod. 2009 Jun;31(3):247-53. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjn110. Epub 2009 Apr 2.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of cephalometric measurements made with digital tracing software (FACAD) with equivalent hand-traced measurements, and to evaluate the reproducibility of each method. Pre- and post-surgical lateral cephalographs of 30 adult patients (12 males and 18 females, median age = 25 years, standard deviation = 8.7) who had undergone orthognathic treatment were scanned into a computer. One operator identified 25 landmarks digitally on the computer display and manually on acetate paper. Measurements on the 60 radiographs were duplicated, and measurement error of each method was determined with interclass correlation. A paired t-test was used to detect differences between the manual and digital methods. Overall, greater variability in digital cephalometric measurements was found. Differences in Gn', Li, Si, and Ii-Li measurements between the two methods were statistically (P < 0.05), but not clinically significant. The findings indicate that the results of the two investigated tracing methods are similar and that digital tracing with FACAD is reliable and can be used routinely.

摘要

本研究的目的是比较使用数字追踪软件(FACAD)进行的头影测量与等效的手工追踪测量的准确性,并评估每种方法的可重复性。将30例接受正颌治疗的成年患者(12例男性和18例女性,中位年龄 = 25岁,标准差 = 8.7)的术前和术后侧位头影测量片扫描进计算机。一名操作人员在计算机显示屏上数字化地识别出25个标志点,并在醋酸纸上手工识别。对60张X线片进行测量,并通过组内相关分析确定每种方法的测量误差。使用配对t检验来检测手工和数字方法之间的差异。总体而言,发现数字头影测量的变异性更大。两种方法在Gn'、Li、Si和Ii-Li测量上的差异具有统计学意义(P < 0.05),但在临床上不显著。研究结果表明,两种研究的追踪方法结果相似,使用FACAD进行数字追踪是可靠的,可常规使用。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验