Indian journal of dental research : official publication of Indian Society for Dental Research · 2023
Evaluating diagnostic performance of three cephalometric vertical parameters.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Azeez Saya M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The goal of this research was to see how reliable and valid three selected parameters from different analysis were in detecting the vertical skeletal pattern.
METHODS: There were 94 cephalometric x-rays used in all. The vertical skeletal pattern was assessed using the mandibular plane angle by Steiner, Frankfort mandibular angle by Tweed, and facial axis angle by McNamara. According to the diagnostic results of the majority of the measures, the samples were classified as normo-divergent, hypodivergent, or hyperdivergent. Kappa statistics, positive predictive value, and sensitivity were employed to verify the validity and reliability of the analyses.
RESULTS: A statistically significant weak negative correlation was found between Frankfort mandibular angle and facial axis angle in female group (p value < 0.01). A good agreement was found between mandibular plane angle with final diagnosis (K = 0.726). The mandibular plane angle showed highest sensitivity and positive predictive value in hypodivergent group (0.939, 0.816) and normo-divergent group (0.795, 0.833), respectively.
CONCLUSION: For determining the facial vertical growth pattern the most accurate indicators were identified to be mandibular plane angle (SN-GoGn) and Frankfort mandibular angle.
METHODS: There were 94 cephalometric x-rays used in all. The vertical skeletal pattern was assessed using the mandibular plane angle by Steiner, Frankfort mandibular angle by Tweed, and facial axis angle by McNamara. According to the diagnostic results of the majority of the measures, the samples were classified as normo-divergent, hypodivergent, or hyperdivergent. Kappa statistics, positive predictive value, and sensitivity were employed to verify the validity and reliability of the analyses.
RESULTS: A statistically significant weak negative correlation was found between Frankfort mandibular angle and facial axis angle in female group (p value < 0.01). A good agreement was found between mandibular plane angle with final diagnosis (K = 0.726). The mandibular plane angle showed highest sensitivity and positive predictive value in hypodivergent group (0.939, 0.816) and normo-divergent group (0.795, 0.833), respectively.
CONCLUSION: For determining the facial vertical growth pattern the most accurate indicators were identified to be mandibular plane angle (SN-GoGn) and Frankfort mandibular angle.