Affiliation:
1. Department of Orthodontics, Rey Juan Carlos University, 28922 Alcorcón, Spain
Abstract
Background: The objective of this study was to compare the facial pattern according to Steiner’s cephalometric analysis with other facial measurement methods (Ricketts, Björk-Jarabak, and McNamara). Methods: 200 patients from a university orthodontic clinic were studied. Measurements were taken using Ricketts, Steiner, Björk-Jarabak, and McNamara methods. Results were compared using standard deviation proportions. Results: Significant differences were found between Steiner’s method and the gold standard. No differences were observed between mixed and permanent dentition groups. Errors were noted in facial type classification: 54.8% in the brachyfacial group, 80% in the mesofacial group and 14.5% in the dolichofacial group. Conclusion: The mandibular angle of Steiner tends to make a diagnosis more towards the dolichofacial type compared to other methods. A protocol is proposed to adjust the value of the mandibular angle of Steiner to the other three methods in a Spanish population.
Reference25 articles.
1. Comparison of Condylar Position in Hyperdivergent and Hypodivergent Facial Skeletal Types;Girardot;Angle Orthod.,2001
2. A new X-ray technique and its application to orthodontia;Broadbent;Angle Orthod.,1931
3. Cephalometric Soft Tissue Facial Analysis;Bergman;Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.,1999
4. Dolphin Imaging Software: An Analysis of the Accuracy of Cephalometric Digitization and Orthognathic Prediction;Power;Int. J. Oral. Maxillofac. Surg.,2005
5. Cephalometric Morphological Analysis: What Information Does It Give You?;Nielsen;Int. Orthod.,2011