IADR Abstract Archives

Are Cephalometric and Photographic Soft-Tissue Profiles Created Equal?

Objective: The soft-tissue profile has become increasingly important in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning.  Practitioners rely on both the hard- and soft-tissue measurements gathered radiographically.  Lateral photographs, however, tend to be used qualitatively to visualize the patient’s profile at rest.  The objective of this retrospective study is to systematically compare soft-tissue profiles attained radiographically with those attained photographically.

Method: 49 patients, recently evaluated for treatment at a private orthodontic practice, were randomly selected.   Only angular, not linear, measurements were chosen to minimize errors of photographic distance variation.  The six diagnostic angles chosen for this study are:  (1)nasolabial, (2)mentolabial, (3)upper-lip-position-a, (4)upper-lip-position-b, (5)lower-lip-position, and (6)upper-to-lower-lip relationship. A commercially available software system, OrthoTrac, produced a digital protractor that created the measurements on the lateral photograph and then on the cephalogram.   A total of twelve measurements were carried out for each patient.  Next, statistical analysis was performed to evaluate the data against the null hypothesis (Ho = no difference in results by measurement method). 

Result: A statistically significant difference was found with three of the six diagnostic angles. Using a paired T-test to compare the means (critical P-value 0.05), a significant difference was found between the cephalometric and photographic measurements for three diagnostic angles: upper-to-lower-lip relationship (p<0.001), upper-lip-position-b (p<0.001), and mentolabial (p=0.001).  For these angles, we reject the null hypothesis.  For the remaining diagnostic angles, no significant difference was found.

Conclusion: Soft-tissue profiles attained via cephalometric radiography appear to vary from those gathered via photograph.  Further research is needed to more thoroughly describe the nature and extent of the discrepancies, to determine the potential causes, and to evaluate the relevance of these discrepancies with regard to treatment decisions and outcomes.

Division: IADR/AMER General Session
Meeting: 2014 IADR/AMER General Session (Cape Town, South Africa)
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Year: 2014
Final Presentation ID: 476
Abstract Category|Abstract Category(s): Craniofacial Biology
Authors
  • Browne, Clark  ( School of Dentistry, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA )
  • Browne, Clark  ( School of Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA )
  • Kau, Chung How  ( School of Dentistry, Department of Orthodontics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA )
  • SESSION INFORMATION
    Poster Session
    Orthodontics: Etiology and Diagnosis
    06/26/2014