ISSN : 0376-4672
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the measurement error between conventional films, digital cephalographs and hardcopy. The material consisted of 29 cephalographs which used image modality of Asahi CX-90SP in the Kyung Hee University Dental Hospital. One observer measured fiducial measurements at an interval of four weeks. Measurement error was tested by Dahlberg's formula. A paired t-test was used to detect it between each modality. The results are as follows; 1. The monitor-displayed digital image showed enlargement compared with the conventional image. The cephalometric measurements of the monitor-displayed digital image and conventional image were no statistically significant difference except SNB. 2. In conventional image, measurement errors of linear and angular measurements were 0.23mm, 0.36°, respective. In monitor-displayed digital image, measurement errors of linear and angular measurements were 0.63mm, 0.48°, respective. 3. The reduction ratio of hardcopy was 1.01% compared to the monitor-displayed digital image. Based on the results, it indicates that the digital cephalographs and hardcopy using storage phosphor digital radiography showed the same accuracy as the conventional films in clinical use.
1. 서영훈, 최영철. 측두 규격방사선사진 촬영 시 두부의 위치변화가 확대율에 미치는 영향. 대한소아치과학회지 2001;28:185-194.
2. Bruntz LQ, Palomo JM, Baden S, Hans MG. A comparison of scanned lateral cephalograms with corresponding original radiographs. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;130:340-348.
3. Paredes V, Gandia JL, Cibrian R. Digital diagnosis records in orthodontics. An overview. Med Oral Pathol Oral Cir Bucal 2006;11:88-93.
4. Forsyth DB, Shaw WC, Richmond S, Roberts CT. Digital imaging of cephalometric radiographs, part 2: image quality. Angle Orthod 1996;66:43-50.
5. 유상훈. 디지탈 두부 X-선 계측 사진 계측사진 필름과 모니터상 계측점의 신뢰성에 관한 비교 연구. 석사학위논문. 서울대학교. 2004.
6. Lim KF, Foong KWC. Phosphor-stimulated computed cephalometry : Reliability of landmark identification. British J Orthod 1997;24:301-308.
7. Chen YJ, Chen SK, Chang HF, Chen KC. Comparison of Landmark Identification in Traditional Versus Computer-Aided Digital Cephalometry. Angle Orthod 2000;70:387-392.
8. Geelen W, Wenzel A, Gotfredsen E, Kruger M, Hansson LG. Reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks on conventional film, hardcopy, and monitor-displayed images obtained by the storage phosphor technique. Eur J Orthod 1998;20:331-340.
9. Nolte K, Muller B, Dibbets J. Comparison of linear measurement in cephalometric studies. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002;122:196-201.
10. Sayinsu K, Isik F, Trakyali G, Arun T. An evaluation of the errors in cephalometric measurements on scanned cephalometric images and conventional tracings. Eur J Orthod 2007;29:105-108.
11. Macri V, Wenzel A. Reliability of landmark recording on film and digital lateral cephalograms. Eur J Orthod 1993;15:137-48.
12. Nimkarn Y. Miles PG. Realibility of computer generated cephalometrics. International Journal of Adult Orthodontics and Orthognathic Surgery 1995;10:43-52.
13. Schulze RW, Gloede MB, Doll GM. Landmark identification on digital versus film-based cephalometric radiographs: A human skull study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002;122:635-42.
14. Dahlberg G. Statistical methods for medical and biological students. New York 1940 Interscience publications.
