Is there consistency in cephalometric landmark identification amongst oral and maxillofacial surgeons?

Abstract There may be significant variation amongst oral and maxillofacial surgeons (OMFS) in the identification and placement of cephalometric landmarks for orthognathic surgery, and this could impact upon the surgical plan and final treatment outcome. In an effort to assess this variability, 10 la...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery 2014-04, Vol.43 (4), p.445-453
Hauptverfasser: Miloro, M, Borba, A.M, Ribeiro-Junior, O, Naclério-Homem, M.G, Jungner, M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract There may be significant variation amongst oral and maxillofacial surgeons (OMFS) in the identification and placement of cephalometric landmarks for orthognathic surgery, and this could impact upon the surgical plan and final treatment outcome. In an effort to assess this variability, 10 lateral cephalometric radiographs were selected for evaluation by 16 OMFS with different levels of surgical knowledge and experience, and the position of 21 commonly used cephalometric landmarks were identified on radiographs displayed on a computer screen using a computer mouse on a pen tablet. The database consisted of real position measurements ( x , y ) to determine the consistency of landmark identification between surgeons and within individual surgeons. Inter-examiner analysis demonstrated that most landmark points had excellent reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient >0.90). Regardless of the level of surgeon experience, certain landmarks presented consistently poor reliability, and intra-examiner reliability analysis demonstrated that some locations had a higher average difference for both x and y axes. In particular, porion, condylion, and gonion showed poor agreement and reliability between examiners. The identification of most landmarks showed some inconsistencies within different parameters of evaluation. Such variability among surgeons may be addressed by the consistent use of high-quality images, and also by periodic surgeon education of the definition of the specific landmarks.
ISSN:0901-5027
1399-0020
DOI:10.1016/j.ijom.2013.08.007