Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Division, Saint Francis Hospital, Cambé, PR, Brazil.
J Appl Oral Sci. 2013 Mar-Apr;21(2):167-76. doi: 10.1590/1678-7757201302326.
The aim of this study was to compare the reliability of three different methods of cephalometric analysis.
Conventional pretreatment lateral cephalograms and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans from 50 subjects from a radiological clinic were selected in order to test the three methods: manual tracings (MT), digitized lateral cephalograms (DLC), and lateral cephalograms from CBCT (LC-CBCT). The lateral cephalograms were manually analyzed through the Dolphin Imaging 11.0™ software. Twenty measurements were performed under the same conditions, and retraced after a 30-day period. Paired t tests and the Dahlberg formula were used to evaluate the intra-examiner errors. The Pearson's correlation coefficient and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were used to compare the differences between the methods.
Intra-examiner reliability occurred for all methods for most of the measurements. Only six measurements were different between the methods and an agreement was observed in the analyses among the 3 methods.
The results demonstrated that all evaluated methodologies are reliable and valid for scientific research, however, the method used in the lateral cephalograms from the CBCT proved the most reliable.
本研究旨在比较三种不同的头影测量分析方法的可靠性。
从一家放射科诊所选择了 50 名患者的常规预处理侧位头颅 X 光片和锥形束 CT（CBCT）扫描，以测试三种方法：手动描记（MT）、数字化侧位头颅 X 光片（DLC）和 CBCT 的侧位头颅 X 光片（LC-CBCT）。使用 Dolphin Imaging 11.0™ 软件对手动侧位头颅 X 光片进行分析。在相同条件下进行了 20 次测量，并在 30 天后进行了重新测量。使用配对 t 检验和 Dahlberg 公式评估内部检验员误差。使用 Pearson 相关系数和单向方差分析（ANOVA）检验来比较方法之间的差异。
所有方法对于大多数测量的内部检验员可靠性均得到验证。只有 6 项测量值在方法之间存在差异，并且在 3 种方法的分析中观察到了一致性。
结果表明，所有评估的方法对于科学研究都是可靠和有效的，但是，来自 CBCT 的侧位头颅 X 光片中使用的方法被证明最可靠。
