RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Since the introduction of digitization in cephalometrics, orthodontics has experienced a new horizon. Technological advancement is usually followed by comparisons between the methods. AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare values of cephalometric analysis performed by CephNinja and NemoCeph for Downs's analysis. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: This prospective study was conducted using 100 diagnostic digital lateral cephalograms taken from the same machine. The samples were collected by non-probability convenience sampling procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The diagnostic images were cropped to standard lateral cephalogram film dimension; a scale image was placed on the top for calibration, numbered 1-100 for identification and was saved in Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) format. A laptop with mouse-controlled cursor was used for NemoCeph and an android phone controlled with finger touch screen was used for CephNinja. Landmark identification for cephalometric analysis was carried out as demanded by the software. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for comparison between the variables, and one-way ANOVA followed by post hoc test was carried out to check the level of significance using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software program, version 11.0. RESULTS: The result showed that the difference of mean values obtained using the two software showed no statistical significance for 70% variables. Y-axis, incisor occlusal plane angle, and the upper incisor to A-Pog showed a statistically significant difference. CONCLUSION: CephNinja presented a satisfactory result with NemoCeph, and can be used interchangeably with confidence.
RESUMO
AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the values of Steiner's cephalometric analysis using Nemoceph and Foxit PDF Reader. No significant difference between the two methods will result in that Foxit PDF Reader can be used as a cost-effective alternative. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was conducted on 100 digital lateral cephalograms taken from the same machine. The samples were collected by nonprobability convenience sampling procedures. These images were analyzed for Steiner's cephalometric analysis using two software packages. RESULTS: The skeletal and dental values showed no statistically significant difference in the majority, except for the L1-NA (linear) and L1-NB (linear). CONCLUSION: Results showed that there is a high agreement between the two methods. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This article provides a simple and cost-effective method of onscreen cephalometric analysis. This technique uses the inbuilt measurement tools in the tool bar of our daily use software. The method can be used independently anywhere without any internet connection and software subscription.
