Análisis Comparativo de la Repetibilidad y Reproductibilidad de Dos Métodos de Medición de la Dimensión Vertical en Rehabilitación Oral: Una Revisión Sistemática

Ortega, Lorena Brenes; Arrieta, Gorka Santamaría; Fernández-González, Felipe J.; Blanco, Nerea Martín; Álvarez, José Antonio Vega; Solaberrieta, Eneko; Pinta, Iker Bellanco de la; Velasco, Aritza Brizuela

doi:10.4067/s0718-381x2016000100010

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These alterations plus missing teeth lead to decreased or increased VDO, which is visualized by changes in the distance between the nasal spine (Subnasale, "Sn") and the most anterior inferior point of the chin (Soft Tissue Menton, "Me"). When the mandible is in physiologic rest position with non-contacting teeth, it is called rest vertical dimension (RVD), which differs from VDO [15][16][17] . Many methods have been suggested over the past decades to establish VDO: swallowing, phonetic, rest position, maximum closing force, pre-extraction records, Willis, Landa, McGee, Hayakawa, comfort, cephalometric, anthropometric and Knebelman's craniometric method, but none of them can register VDO objectively.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vertical Dimension of Occlusion: A comparative study between Anthropometric and Knebelman’s craniometric methods

Avila-Vásquez¹,

Vergara-Sarmiento²,

Crespo-Crespo³

2021

Acta Odontol Latinoam

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The masticatory system changes as time passes. The vertical dimension of occlusion (VDO) undergoes alterations due to temporomandibular joint disorders which in turn may be caused by related muscle modifications or pathological tooth wear. There are many methods to measure VDO. Among these, the anthropometric method and Knebelman’s craniometric method have been shown to be the most closely related to facial biotype. The aim of this study was to compare data recorded with those two methods. A descriptive cross-sectional study was performed with a total 200 patients. A vernier caliper was used to measure facial landmarks. Results were analyzed using paired t-test, setting the level of significance at p<0.05. There was no significant difference between the two methods but Knebelman’s method had less variability. Results suggest that Knebelman’s method should provide more reliability for determining VDO in all the facial biotypes studied.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%