File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Assessment of maxillary position: Implant vs cephalometric methods

TitleAssessment of maxillary position: Implant vs cephalometric methods
Authors
KeywordsCephalometrics
Implants
Maxilla
Superimposition
Issue Date2010
PublisherE H Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.angle.org/
Citation
Angle Orthodontist, 2010, v. 80 n. 5, p. 876-883 How to Cite?
AbstractObjective: To compare changes in maxillary position assessed from a maxillary implant and three cephalometric methods based on linear measurements. Methods: Series of tracings of the maxilla obtained around puberty from an implant study were analyzed. The displacement of the implant was used to determine the direction and amount of "actual" maxillary growth. Displacement of point A was measured according to three cephalometric methods. The values obtained from absolute, horizontal, and vertical displacement of point A by three cephalometric methods and by the implant method were compared. Results: Results showed that estimation of displacement of the maxilla by three cephalometric methods (point A) was significantly larger than that of the implant method in all directions. The average difference in the horizontal plane was 0.7 mm, 1.2 mm, and 1.6 mm, respectively; the average difference in the vertical plane was 2.2 mm, 2.5 mm, and 3.6 mm, respectively. Conclusions: Estimations of changes in maxillary position by the implant method and by cephalometric methods were not proportional. All three cephalometric methods overestimated changes in the position of the maxilla. © 2010 by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/129074
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 1.579
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.254
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorVerayannont, Pen_HK
dc.contributor.authorHägg, Uen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWong, RWKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorMcGrath, Cen_HK
dc.contributor.authorYeung, Sen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-12-23T08:32:06Z-
dc.date.available2010-12-23T08:32:06Z-
dc.date.issued2010en_HK
dc.identifier.citationAngle Orthodontist, 2010, v. 80 n. 5, p. 876-883en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0003-3219en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/129074-
dc.description.abstractObjective: To compare changes in maxillary position assessed from a maxillary implant and three cephalometric methods based on linear measurements. Methods: Series of tracings of the maxilla obtained around puberty from an implant study were analyzed. The displacement of the implant was used to determine the direction and amount of "actual" maxillary growth. Displacement of point A was measured according to three cephalometric methods. The values obtained from absolute, horizontal, and vertical displacement of point A by three cephalometric methods and by the implant method were compared. Results: Results showed that estimation of displacement of the maxilla by three cephalometric methods (point A) was significantly larger than that of the implant method in all directions. The average difference in the horizontal plane was 0.7 mm, 1.2 mm, and 1.6 mm, respectively; the average difference in the vertical plane was 2.2 mm, 2.5 mm, and 3.6 mm, respectively. Conclusions: Estimations of changes in maxillary position by the implant method and by cephalometric methods were not proportional. All three cephalometric methods overestimated changes in the position of the maxilla. © 2010 by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc.en_HK
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherE H Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.angle.org/en_HK
dc.relation.ispartofAngle Orthodontisten_HK
dc.subjectCephalometricsen_HK
dc.subjectImplantsen_HK
dc.subjectMaxillaen_HK
dc.subjectSuperimpositionen_HK
dc.titleAssessment of maxillary position: Implant vs cephalometric methodsen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0003-3219&volume=80&issue=5&spage=876&epage=883&date=2010&atitle=Assessment+of+maxillary+position:+implant+versus+cephalometric+methods-
dc.identifier.emailHägg, U:euohagg@hkusua.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailWong, RWK:fyoung@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailMcGrath, C:mcgrathc@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityHägg, U=rp00020en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityWong, RWK=rp00038en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityMcGrath, C=rp00037en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_OA_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.2319/112009-659.1en_HK
dc.identifier.pmid20578858-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-77955642208en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros176977en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-77955642208&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume80en_HK
dc.identifier.issue5en_HK
dc.identifier.spage876en_HK
dc.identifier.epage883en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000281471900012-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridVerayannont, P=36344311000en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHägg, U=7006790279en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, RWK=7402127170en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridMcGrath, C=7102335507en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridYeung, S=36341908100en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats