File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Comparison of cephalometrics analysis using a non-radiographic sonic digitizer (DigiGraph Workstation) with conventional radiography

TitleComparison of cephalometrics analysis using a non-radiographic sonic digitizer (DigiGraph Workstation) with conventional radiography
Authors
Issue Date1999
PublisherOxford University Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://ejo.oxfordjournals.org/
Citation
European Journal of Orthodontics, 1999, v. 21 n. 1, p. 1-13 How to Cite?
AbstractCephalometric analysis conventionally requires radiographic exposure which may not be compatible with the growing concern over radiation hazards. Recently, the Dolphin Workstation Imaging System introduced to the dental profession a non-radiographic system, called the DigiGraph Workstation which may be an alternative to cephalometric radiography. The aims of this study were to compare the validity and reproducibility of cephalometric measurements obtained from the DigiGraph Workstation with conventional cephalometric radiographs. The sample consisted of 30 human dry skulls. Two replicated sets of lateral cephalograms were obtained with steel ball markers placed at the majority of the cephalometric landmarks. Duplicate tracings prepared from each radiograph were digitized to obtain cephalometric measurements using the computer software, Dentofacial Planner. For the DigiGraph Workstation, double sonic digitizations were repeated twice for each skull, on two occasions. Fifteen angular and one linear measurements were obtained from both methods and these findings compared using ANOVA, paired t-tests and F-tests. All, except one, cephalometric measurement showed significant differences between the two methods (P < 0.0001). The DigiGraph Workstation consistently produced higher values in 11 measurements (mean differences +0.5 to +15.7 degrees or mm) and lower values in four measurements (mean differences -0.2 to -3.5 degrees). The standard deviations of the differences between readings of both methods were large (0.4-5.8 degrees or mm). The reproducibility of the DigiGraph Workstation measurements was lower than that of the radiographic measurements. The method error of the DigiGraph Workstation ranged from 7 to 70 per cent, while that of radiographic tracings was less than 2 per cent. It was concluded that measurements obtained with the DigiGraph Workstation should be interpreted with caution.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/48928
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 1.44
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.090
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorTsang, KSen_HK
dc.contributor.authorCooke, MSen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2008-06-12T06:29:54Z-
dc.date.available2008-06-12T06:29:54Z-
dc.date.issued1999en_HK
dc.identifier.citationEuropean Journal of Orthodontics, 1999, v. 21 n. 1, p. 1-13en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0141-5387en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/48928-
dc.description.abstractCephalometric analysis conventionally requires radiographic exposure which may not be compatible with the growing concern over radiation hazards. Recently, the Dolphin Workstation Imaging System introduced to the dental profession a non-radiographic system, called the DigiGraph Workstation which may be an alternative to cephalometric radiography. The aims of this study were to compare the validity and reproducibility of cephalometric measurements obtained from the DigiGraph Workstation with conventional cephalometric radiographs. The sample consisted of 30 human dry skulls. Two replicated sets of lateral cephalograms were obtained with steel ball markers placed at the majority of the cephalometric landmarks. Duplicate tracings prepared from each radiograph were digitized to obtain cephalometric measurements using the computer software, Dentofacial Planner. For the DigiGraph Workstation, double sonic digitizations were repeated twice for each skull, on two occasions. Fifteen angular and one linear measurements were obtained from both methods and these findings compared using ANOVA, paired t-tests and F-tests. All, except one, cephalometric measurement showed significant differences between the two methods (P < 0.0001). The DigiGraph Workstation consistently produced higher values in 11 measurements (mean differences +0.5 to +15.7 degrees or mm) and lower values in four measurements (mean differences -0.2 to -3.5 degrees). The standard deviations of the differences between readings of both methods were large (0.4-5.8 degrees or mm). The reproducibility of the DigiGraph Workstation measurements was lower than that of the radiographic measurements. The method error of the DigiGraph Workstation ranged from 7 to 70 per cent, while that of radiographic tracings was less than 2 per cent. It was concluded that measurements obtained with the DigiGraph Workstation should be interpreted with caution.en_HK
dc.format.extent420 bytes-
dc.format.mimetypetext/html-
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherOxford University Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://ejo.oxfordjournals.org/en_HK
dc.rightsCreative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License-
dc.subject.meshCephalometry - methodsen_HK
dc.subject.meshRadiography, Dentalen_HK
dc.subject.meshSignal Processing, Computer-Assisteden_HK
dc.subject.meshUltrasonography - methodsen_HK
dc.subject.meshAnalysis of Varianceen_HK
dc.titleComparison of cephalometrics analysis using a non-radiographic sonic digitizer (DigiGraph Workstation) with conventional radiographyen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0141-5387&volume=21&issue=1&spage=1&epage=13&date=1999&atitle=Comparison+of+cephalometrics+analysis+using+a+non-radiographic+sonic+digitizer+(DigiGraph+Workstation)+with+conventional+radiographyen_HK
dc.identifier.emailCooke, MS: cookie@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_versionen_HK
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/ejo/21.1.1en_HK
dc.identifier.pmid10191573-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0033072926-
dc.identifier.hkuros39474-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000078995600001-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats