A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Comparison of reproducibility of natural head position using two methods. | LitMetric

Comparison of reproducibility of natural head position using two methods.

J Contemp Dent Pract

Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Sri Rajiv Gandhi College of Dental Sciences and Hospital, Cholanagar, Bengaluru, Karnataka India.

Published: January 2012


Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Unlabelled: Lateral cephalometric radiographs have become virtually indispensable to orthodontists in the treatment of patients. They are important in orthodontic growth analysis, diagnosis, treatment planning, monitoring of therapy and evaluation of final treatment outcome.

Aim: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the maximum reproducibility with minimum variation of natural head position using two methods, i.e. the mirror method and the fluid level device method.

Materials And Methods: The study included two sets of 40 lateral cephalograms taken using two methods of obtaining natural head position: (1) The mirror method and (2) fluid level device method, with a time interval of 2 months. Inclusion criteria • Subjects were randomly selected aged between 18 to 26 years Exclusion criteria • History of orthodontic treatment • Any history of respiratory tract problem or chronic mouth breathing • Any congenital deformity • History of traumatically-induced deformity • History of myofacial pain syndrome • Any previous history of head and neck surgery.

Results: The result showed that both the methods for obtaining natural head position-the mirror method and fluid level device method were comparable, but maximum reproducibility was more with the fluid level device as shown by the Dahlberg's coefficient and Bland-Altman plot. The minimum variance was seen with the fluid level device method as shown by Precision and Pearson correlation.

Conclusion: The mirror method and the fluid level device method used for obtaining natural head position were comparable without any significance, and the fluid level device method was more reproducible and showed less variance when compared to mirror method for obtaining natural head position.

Clinical Significance: Fluid level device method was more reproducible and shows less variance when compared to mirror method for obtaining natural head position.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1092DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

fluid level
32
level device
32
natural head
28
mirror method
24
device method
24
head position
20
obtaining natural
20
method fluid
16
• history
16
method
12

Similar Publications