Assessing the Reliability of Computer Aided Digital Cephalometric Tracing Versus Manual Cephalometric Tracing- A Comparative Study.

Main Article Content

Faizan Ali, Anil prashar


The aim of this study was to assess the reliability of computer aided digital cephalometric tracing methods versus manual cephalometric tracing method.

 MATERIALS & METHODS The study was conducted on pre-treatment lateral cephalograms of 72 subjects which were obtained from Department of Orthodontics & Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Desh Bhagat Dental College & Hospital, Mandi Gobindgarh, Punjab. All the Cephalograms were traced both manually and digitally. The analysis   used for study were Steiner’s analysis, Down’s analysis & Tweed’s analysis. Lateral cephalograms of the patients were traced with 3H drawing pencil using standard protocols. For digital tracing cephalometric points and lines were demarcated digitally by using three different softwares that were, Autoceph, Nemoceph & Oneceph. The accuracy and reliability of cephalometric measurements of digital and manual cephalometric tracing was evaluated and the measurements from two methods were also compared. MANOVA followed by Tukey’s post hoc test was carried out to determine the difference between the groups. All statistical tests were performed at a significance level of 5% (p ≤ .05).

 RESULTS; Three parameters of Steiner’s analysis showed statistical significant difference (p<0.005) when compared among the four tracing methods. These parameters were OCCL to SN, S line to UL, S line to LL. The mean value of facial angle measured from Manual tracing and other three softwares were statistically different (p value<0.05), angle of convexity was also significantly different among manual and digital tracing methods (p value is 0.01) ,A-B plane angle and mandibular plane angle were also  significantly different (p value is 0.001) among the four tracing methods and the values of Y Axis and cant of occlusion plane were also significantly different among four tracing methods and  for cant of occlusion as obtained from manual tracing, Autoceph, Nemoceph and Oneceph tracing method. Statistically significant differences were observed in values of incisor occlusal plane angle and incisor mandibular plane angle (p value 0.01).

CONCLUSION;It was concluded that Autoceph, Nemoceph and Oneceph provided cephalometric measurements as accurate as the manual method in most of the parameters and  AUTOCEPH gave the most accurate and reliable result, which was followed by NemoCeph and Oneceph respectively among three digital softwares.

Article Details