Assessment of facial and cranial development and comparison of anthropometric ratios.

BACKGROUND

Anthropometry is the biologic science of human body measurement. Craniofacial anthropometry discusses the characteristics on the measures of different soft and hard tissues of the head and face, and it is considered an important paraclinical record for the growth and development of the index and also for the diagnosis and curing orthodontic matters. Studying the craniofacial anthropometrics ratios is very useful in sciences such as dentistry, medicine, maxillofacial surgery, growth and development studies, plastic surgery, bioengineering, and nonmedical branches such as respiratory equipment and eye-glasses industries.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to determine Iranian cranial and facial anthropometric ratios and compare anthropometric ratios between Iranian and Canadian populations.

METHODS

This cross-sectional analytical study was done randomly on 564 four-to-eleven-year-old boys from Shirvan (North Khorasan, Iran) with normal face patterns. Facial and cranial ratios were estimated and compared. Data were analyzed by SPSS software. The mean values of these parameters were calculated .Finally, the regression line and the growth coefficient were determined for each parameter. Furthermore, the mean anthropometric measurement of Iranians was compared with Canadians. Student t test was used for comparing the measured values.

RESULTS

Iranian population when born has hypereuryprosopic face and hypercephalic cranium form. While getting older, the midface height increases, face becomes more prominent, chin becomes shorter, and the face and cranium change to eurycephalic and hyperleptoprosopic form, respectively. Comparison of results related to the face and cranium size between Iranian and Canadian boys (4-11 years old) showed that many craniofacial ratios have significant differences (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately, all of the anthropometric measurements in Iranian population and Canadians were significantly different. Considering the significant difference in the facial and cranial anthropologic ratios and size among Iranians and Canadians, the results obtained from Canadians should not be applied as criteria for treatment plans. Because of the wide population affinity combinations in Iran, more studies, with wider variations, should be conducted among different Iranian population affinity.