Agreement Evaluation of Cephalometric Analysis between Smartphone Application and Computer Software

doi:10.13701/j.cnki.kqyxyj.2021.08.007

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: To investigate the accuracy of cephalometric measurements performed by smartphone application (App). Methods: Both computer software and smartphone app were used to trace total twelve measurements of 55 patients' lateral cephalograms. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess the intra-tool reliability. Statistic differences between two methods were evaluated using the paired t-test. The agreement of these two methods was evaluated by the 95% confidence interval (CI) of 95% limits of agreement (LoA), which was calculated by the Bland-Altman method. Results: All ICC values from repeated measurements by each method were above 0.9. There was no significant statistically difference between two methods in all cephalometric measurements (P>0.05). The 95% CI of 95% LoA of SNA, SNB, ANB, SN-MP, Y-Axis, U1-NA (mm), L1-NB (mm), UL-E line, and LL-E line were within clinically acceptable limits, except for U1-NA, L1-NB, and U1-L1. Conclusion: Smartphone app showed good agreement with computer software in skeletal and soft tissue measurements of cephalometric analysis. It was recommended to use Smartphone app in cephalometric analysis for its portable, accurate, and reliable property.

Key words: cephalometrics, smartphone, application, Bland-Altman method

LIU Henglang, FENG Linjing, WANG Lili. Agreement Evaluation of Cephalometric Analysis between Smartphone Application and Computer Software[J]. Journal of Oral Science Research, 2021, 37(8): 702-707.

References

[1] 靳云轶,张淋坤.不同年龄女性软硬组织内收量的相关性研究[J].口腔医学研究,2020,36(8):766-769.
[2] 郭静,周梅,刘照永.新疆维汉青少年骨性Ⅰ类错牙合畸形X线头影测量研究[J].口腔医学研究,2017,33(10):1095-1098.
[3] Mamillapalli PK, Sesham VM, Neela PK, et al. A smartphone app for cephalometric analysis [J]. J Clin Orthod, 2016, 50(11): 694-633.
[4] Chen YJ, Chen SK, Chung-Chen Yao J, et al. The effects of differences in landmark identification on the cephalometric measurements in traditional versus digitized cephalometry [J]. Angle Orthod, 2004, 74(2): 155-161.
[5] 张艳,肖倩.医务人员智能手机APP使用现状的调查与分析[J].中华现代护理杂志,2019,25(33):4315-4318.
[6] Livas C, Delli K, Spijkervet FKL, et al. Concurrent validity and reliability of cephalometric analysis using smartphone apps and computer software [J]. Angle Orthod, 2019, 89(6): 889-896.
[7] Aksakallι S, Yιlancι H, GörÜkmez E, et al. Reliability assessment of orthodontic apps for cephalometrics [J]. Turk J Orthod, 2016, 29(4): 98.
[8] Sayar G, Kilinc DD. Manual tracing versus smartphone application (app) tracing: a comparative study [J]. Acta Odontol Scand, 2017, 75(8): 588-594.
[9] Erkan M, Gurel HG, Nur M, et al. Reliability of four different computerized cephalometric analysis programs [J]. Eur J Orthod, 2012, 34(3): 318-321.
[10] Polat-Ozsoy O, Gokcelik A, Toygar Memikoglu TU. Differences in cephalometric measurements: a comparison of digital versus hand-tracing methods [J]. Eur J Orthod, 2009, 31(3): 254-259.
[11] Bland JM, Altman DG. Agreement between methods of measurement with multiple observations per individual [J]. J Biopharm Stat, 2007, 17(4): 571-582.
[12] Arponen H, Elf H, Evälahti M, et al. Reliability of cranial base measurements on lateral skull radiographs [J]. Orthod Craniofac Res, 2008, 11(4): 201-210.
[13] Goracci C, Ferrari M. Reproducibility of measurements in tablet-assisted, PC-aided, and manual cephalometric analysis [J]. Angle Orthod, 2014, 84(3): 437-442.
[14] 冯格,宋锦璘,王涛,等.计算机辅助Delaire头影测量分析方法的研究[J].华西口腔医学杂志,2008,26(2):121-124.
[15] 李镒冲,李晓松.两种测量方法定量测量结果的一致性评价[J].现代预防医学,2007,34(17):3263-3266.
[16] 缪华章,陈林,刘玉秀.定量方法对比研究一致性评价Bland-Altman法LoA的可信区间估计[J].中国卫生统计,2014,31(1):64-67.
[17] 闻浩,陆梦洁.定量测量Bland-Altman一致性评价方法研究及临床应用[J].医学研究生学报,2015,28(10):1107-1111.
[18] 刘序,任静,杨娴睿,等.头影测量中冠长轴与牙长轴倾斜在正常骀的表现[J].华西口腔医学杂志,2016,34(6):606-610.
[19] 王蓉,王铁梅.人工智能在口腔颌面医学影像中的研究探讨[J].口腔医学研究,2020,36(7):619-621.