Comparative Evaluation of Nemoceph and Foxit PDF Reader for Steiner's Cephalometric Analysis.

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the values of Steiner's cephalometric analysis using Nemoceph and Foxit PDF Reader. No significant difference between the two methods will result in that Foxit PDF Reader can be used as a cost-effective alternative.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was conducted on 100 digital lateral cephalograms taken from the same machine. The samples were collected by nonprobability convenience sampling procedures. These images were analyzed for Steiner's cephalometric analysis using two software packages.

RESULTS

The skeletal and dental values showed no statistically significant difference in the majority, except for the L1-NA (linear) and L1-NB (linear).

CONCLUSION

Results showed that there is a high agreement between the two methods.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

This article provides a simple and cost-effective method of onscreen cephalometric analysis. This technique uses the inbuilt measurement tools in the tool bar of our daily use software. The method can be used independently anywhere without any internet connection and software subscription.