Journal of Orthodontic Science

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year
: 2014  |  Volume : 3  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 111--117

Comparison of two three-dimensional cephalometric analysis computer software


Dena Sawchuk1, Adel Alhadlaq2, Thamer Alkhadra2, Terry D Carlyle1, Budi Kusnoto3, Tarek El-Bialy1 
1 Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Alberta, Canada
2 Division of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
3 Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Orthodontic Graduate Program Clinic, University of Illinois, Chicago, USA

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Tarek El-Bialy
7-020D Katz Group Centre for Pharmacy and Health Research, University of Alberta Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2E1
Canada

Background: Three-dimensional cephalometric analyses are getting more attraction in orthodontics. The aim of this study was to compare two softwares to evaluate three-dimensional cephalometric analyses of orthodontic treatment outcomes. Materials and Methods: Twenty cone beam computed tomography images were obtained using i-CAT ® imaging system from patient«SQ»s records as part of their regular orthodontic records. The images were analyzed using InVivoDental5.0 (Anatomage Inc.) and 3DCeph™ (University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA) software. Before and after orthodontic treatments data were analyzed using t-test. Results: Reliability test using interclass correlation coefficient was stronger for InVivoDental5.0 (0.83-0.98) compared with 3DCeph™ (0.51-0.90). Paired t-test comparison of the two softwares shows no statistical significant difference in the measurements made in the two softwares. Conclusions: InVivoDental5.0 measurements are more reproducible and user friendly when compared to 3DCeph™. No statistical difference between the two softwares in linear or angular measurements. 3DCeph™ is more time-consuming in performing three-dimensional analysis compared with InVivoDental5.0. Clinical Implications: InVivoDental5.0 utilizes less time in performing three-dimensional cephalometric measurements compared to 3DCeph™ system.


How to cite this article:
Sawchuk D, Alhadlaq A, Alkhadra T, Carlyle TD, Kusnoto B, El-Bialy T. Comparison of two three-dimensional cephalometric analysis computer software.J Orthodont Sci 2014;3:111-117


How to cite this URL:
Sawchuk D, Alhadlaq A, Alkhadra T, Carlyle TD, Kusnoto B, El-Bialy T. Comparison of two three-dimensional cephalometric analysis computer software. J Orthodont Sci [serial online] 2014 [cited 2021 Jan 18 ];3:111-117
Available from: https://www.jorthodsci.org/article.asp?issn=2278-0203;year=2014;volume=3;issue=4;spage=111;epage=117;aulast=Sawchuk;type=0