Concurrent validity and reliability of cephalometric analysis using smartphone apps and computer software

Livas, Christos; Delli, Konstantina; Spijkervet, Frederik; Vissink, Arjan; Dijkstra, Pieter U.

doi:10.2319/021919-124.1

Cited by 36 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Differences in the number of observations ≥ 2.0 mm or degrees from the grand mean between SLC and RLC were analyzed using a McNemar test. Observations < 2.0 mm or degrees were considered clinically acceptable [12,[18][19][20].…”

Section: Statistical Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Precision of orthodontic cephalometric measurements on ultra low dose-low dose CBCT reconstructed cephalograms

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To analyze differences in variation of orthodontic diagnostic measurements on lateral cephalograms reconstructed from ultra low dose-low dose (ULD-LD) cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans (RLC) as compared to variation of measurements on standard lateral cephalograms (SLC), and to determine if it is justifiable to replace a traditional orthodontic image set for an ULD-LD CBCT with a reconstructed lateral cephalogram. Material and methods ULD-LD CBCT images and SLCs were made of forty-three dry human skulls. From the ULD-LD CBCT dataset, a lateral cephalogram was reconstructed (RLC). Cephalometric landmarks (13 skeletal and 7 dental) were identified on both SLC and RLC twice in two sessions by two calibrated observers. Thirteen cephalometric variables were calculated. Variations of measurements, expressed as standard deviations of the 4 measurements on SLC and RLC, were analyzed using a paired sample t-test. Differences in the number of observations deviating ≥ 2.0 mm or degrees from the grand mean between SLC and RLC were analyzed using a McNemar test. Results Mean SDs for 7 out of 13 variables were significantly smaller for SLCs than those for RLCs, but differences were small. For 9 out of 13 variables, there was no significant difference between SLC and RLC for the number of measurements outside the range of 2 mm or degrees. Conclusions Based on the lower radiation dose and the small differences in variation in cephalometric measurements on reconstructed LC compared to standard dose LC, ULD-LD CBCT with reconstructed LC should be considered for orthodontic diagnostic purposes. Clinical relevance ULD-LD CBCT with reconstructed LC should be considered for orthodontic purposes.

show abstract

Section: Statistical Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Precision of orthodontic cephalometric measurements on ultra low dose-low dose CBCT reconstructed cephalograms

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Usability is the attribute that evaluates how easy to use the software is, containing three dimensions: efficacy, efficiency and satisfaction of use (ISO 2018). To employ new technologies in daily work could represent a barrier for professionals, weighed as a factor of choice against the possibility of not using them (Burzynski et al 2018;Livas et al 2019). Few studies (Westerlund et al 2015;Wan Hassan et al 2016;Felter et al 2018) have evaluated the usability of software related to digital models in Orthodontics and, mostly, they do not consider professional use satisfaction.…”

Section: Usability Of Free Software Used For Visualization and Measurement Of Digital Orthodontic Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Usability of free software used for visualization and measurement of digital orthodontic models

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate the usability of the free software available that allow visualization and measurement of orthodontic digital models. 80 graduate students of orthodontics were asked to perform pre-defined tasks in a digital model through 3D Viewer ® and 3D-Tool ® software. The success in accomplishing the tasks and the time spent were recorded. To end, each participant answered a questionnaire to express their satisfaction regarding the software. There were no statistically significant difference between the software when compared to the accomplishment rates of tasks and the time spent by participants on each one. The software were evaluated as "slightly satisfactory" in several criteria. There is scope for optimization of orthodontic software by manufacturers since lack of their interface usability can discourage orthodontists’ adherence to new resources that could provide benefits to their daily routine, even if they are freely available.

show abstract

“…Computer-aided cephalometrics, automatic identification of cephalometric landmarks via artificial intelligence (AI), and cephalometric analysis using smartphone apps all have gotten attention. [14][15][16][17] Among various superimposition methods, Björk's structural method has been considered as the gold standard. 18 However, this method was used to perform manual superimposition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of an automated superimposition method for computer-aided cephalometrics

Moon¹,

Hwang²,

Lee³

2020

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To evaluate a new superimposition method compatible with computer-aided cephalometrics and to compare superimposition error to that of the conventional Sella-Nasion (SN) superimposition method. Materials and Methods A total of 283 lateral cephalometric radiographs were collected and cephalometric landmark identification was performed twice by the same examiner at a 3-month interval. The second tracing was superimposed on the first tracing by both the SN superimposition method and the new, proposed method. The proposed method not only relied on SN landmarks but also minimized the differences between four additional landmarks: Porion, Orbitale, Basion, and Pterygoid. The errors between the landmarks of the duplicate tracings oriented by the two superimposition methods were calculated at Anterior Nasal Spine, Point A, Point B, Pogonion, and Gonion. The paired t-test was used to find any statistical difference in the superimposition errors by the two superimposition methods and to investigate whether there existed clinically significant differences between the two methods. Results The proposed method demonstrated smaller superimposition errors than did the conventional SN superimposition method. When comparisons between the two superimposition methods were made with a 1-mm error range, there were clinically significant differences between them. Conclusions The proposed method that was compatible with computer-aided cephalometrics might be a reliable superimposition method for superimposing serial cephalometric images.

show abstract

Concurrent validity and reliability of cephalometric analysis using smartphone apps and computer software

Cited by 36 publications

References 24 publications

Precision of orthodontic cephalometric measurements on ultra low dose-low dose CBCT reconstructed cephalograms

Precision of orthodontic cephalometric measurements on ultra low dose-low dose CBCT reconstructed cephalograms

Usability of free software used for visualization and measurement of digital orthodontic models

Evaluation of an automated superimposition method for computer-aided cephalometrics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About