Akhil S, Joseph T Isaac, Girish K L, Sathyan Pradeesh
Department of Oral Pathology, Malabar Dental College and Research Centre, Edappal, Malappuram, Kerala, India.
Department of Oral Pathology, Sree Mookambika Institute of Dental Sciences, Kulasekharam, Kanyakumari, Tamil Nadu, India.
Indian J Dent Res. 2019 May-Jun;30(3):352-357. doi: 10.4103/ijdr.IJDR_768_17.
Most of the scientific formulae for age estimation in forensic odontology were tested among western population and hence cannot be applied to the Indian population consistently. Therefore, it was in this context that Dr. Ashith B. Acharya had carried out a study using the modified Demirjian's method in Indian population and found out that the study gave inferior results for age estimation. So he developed Indian-specific regression analysis and worked out a formula.
This study was done to validate age using Demirjian's eight-teeth method and to compare the effectiveness of Demirjian's formula and Indian-specific formula in Kanyakumari population.
Digital orthopantomographs of 150 patients fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria in the age group of 8-24 years were used in the study. The third quadrant in the radiograph was assessed visually from mandibular central incisor to the third molar using Demirjian's modified criteria chart. Calculation of the dental age was done using Demirjian's formula and Ashith B. Acharya's Indian-specific formula. The difference between chronological age and dental age was calculated, and the mean absolute error (MAE) was obtained.
The MAE was 0.20 years for the whole of Kanyakumari population, and for males it was 0.10 years and for females 0.29 years with Indian-specific formula, whereas the MAE was 2.66, 1.86, and 3.51 years, respectively, for the whole of Kanyakumari population, males, and females using Demirjian's formula.
The observations from this study suggest that the MAE was less between chronological age and estimated dental age which was calculated using Indian-specific formula, compared with the values obtained using Demirjian's formula. Thereby we conclude that Indian-specific formula is more reliable in age estimation of Kanyakumari population.
法医牙科学中大多数年龄估计的科学公式是在西方人群中进行测试的，因此不能始终如一地应用于印度人群。因此，正是在这种背景下，阿希特·B·阿查里亚博士在印度人群中使用改良的德米尔坚方法进行了一项研究，结果发现该研究在年龄估计方面给出的结果较差。于是他开发了印度特定的回归分析并得出了一个公式。
本研究旨在使用德米尔坚的八颗牙齿法验证年龄，并比较德米尔坚公式和印度特定公式在坎亚库马里人群中的有效性。
本研究使用了150名年龄在8至24岁之间符合纳入和排除标准的患者的数字化曲面断层片。使用德米尔坚的改良标准图表，从下颌中切牙到第三磨牙对X光片中的第三象限进行视觉评估。使用德米尔坚公式和阿希特·B·阿查里亚的印度特定公式计算牙龄。计算实际年龄与牙龄之间的差异，并获得平均绝对误差（MAE）。
使用印度特定公式时，整个坎亚库马里人群的MAE为0.20岁，男性为0.10岁，女性为0.29岁；而使用德米尔坚公式时，整个坎亚库马里人群、男性和女性的MAE分别为2.66岁、1.86岁和3.51岁。
本研究的观察结果表明，与使用德米尔坚公式获得的值相比，使用印度特定公式计算的实际年龄与估计牙龄之间的MAE较小。因此我们得出结论，印度特定公式在坎亚库马里人群的年龄估计中更可靠。
