ABSTRACT
In this study, we attempt to identify and trace cephalometric landmarks using two methods within the constraints of hand tracing (manual tracing). In the first method, we identify the specific landmarks pertaining to the particular structure and locate it as a continuation of the landmark tracing. In the second method, we segregate the landmarks but mark only the particular structure with a point in a way which is not too dissimilar to digitalized tracing.METHODS20 lateral Cephalograms were manually traced and analysed by the two different methods employed. Measurement obtained between the two tracings was analysed. Linear and angular measurements were taken for three cephalometric analyses, namely- Steiner’s analysis, McNamara Analysis, and Rakosi-Jarabak’s analysis.RESULTSThe analysis values were checked by the two methods of manual tracing. There seemed to be no significant difference between tracing done by locating the anatomical landmarks associated with the point and with tracing done by locating the reference points. Independent sample t-test was done to determine if any significant difference was present between the two methods of tracing.CONCLUSIONSTracing done by locating only the points after identifying the reference points is in a way, similar to how digital tracing is done. This could help put the doubts related to digitalized tracing to rest and confirm the accuracy of both the tracing methods. However, locating the anatomical landmarks along with the points could help the observer in relating to the point in an easier manner and improve the accuracy of manual tracing by inexperienced postgraduates and beginners.