Validity and comparison between 2D (normal photo) and 3dMD (3D image) in orthodontic diagnosis
Loading...
Files
Date
2018
Authors
Neishaboory, Amin
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Objective:
The aim was to evaluate the validity and comparison between direct anthropometry measurements as the “Gold Standard” with 2D-images (Normal Photo) and 3D-images (3dMD) as a new contemporary tool for orthodontic diagnosis.
Methods & Materials:
51 subjects (22 Male and 29 Female) were randomly selected, without facial deformity, surgery or facial hair. Eight anatomical landmarks were selected and plotted on the face to create 7 linear and 4 angular measurements which were measured directly (D) by a digital caliper and a protractor (www.examobile.com).
Photos (2D) were taken with a Nikon DSLR camera and ring flash in NHP as well as a 3D-image with the 3dMD system (Atlanta, Georgia, USA). Both 2D photos and 3D images were analyzed by Tracker (www.opensourcephysics.org/Douglas Brown) and Vultus software for the same linear and angular parameters measured for each subject, respectively.
10% of the samples (5 cases) were randomly re-measured for intra-observer reproducibility. Collected data were analyzed by SAS using the paired t-test to compare the validity of direct (D), 2D and 3D measurements.
Results:
The results show no statistically significant difference between the direct measurement group (D) and 3D measurements. (p > 0.05) but a highly statistically significant difference is evident between the direct measurement group (D) and 2D measurements. (p < 0.01)
The 2D and 3D measurement groups also showed a statistically significant difference.(p < 0.05)
Conclusion:
➤ This study has validated the accuracy of 3D measurements versus direct measurement.
➤ 3D measurement techniques are more accurate, almost by 1mm in linear and up to 1 degree in angular measurements, than 2D techniques.
Description
Keywords
Facial diagnostic in orthodontics