SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.63 issue4Therapeutic effects of exercise with overload on lipid profile sedentary adultsPsychometric properties of the short form of the Bruininks Oseretsky test of motor proficiency in children between 4 and 7 years in Chía and Bogotá - Colombia author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO
  • On index processSimilars in Google

Share


Revista de la Facultad de Medicina

Print version ISSN 0120-0011

Abstract

SIMANCAS-PALLARES, Miguel; RUBIO-ROMERO, Jorge Andrés  and  CORTES-REYES, Edgar. Reproducibility between conventional and digital periapical radiography for bone height measurement. rev.fac.med. [online]. 2015, vol.63, n.4, pp.625-631. ISSN 0120-0011.  http://dx.doi.org/10.15446/revfacmed.v63.n4.53224.

Background. Several diagnostic aids are available for bone height measurement. Digital and conventional radiographs are the two ones most used in Dentistry. Few studies accounting for accuracy and precision have been conducted to compare these methods. Objective. The aim of this study was to estimate reproducibility between conventional and digital periapical radiography in bone height measurement in patients with chronic periodontitis. Methods. a consistency diagnostic test study was performed. 136 patients with chronic periodontitis were included, selecting the worst prognosis teeth and two radiographs -conventional and digital- were taken for each one. Two experienced and blinded examiners performed radiographic measurements. Reproducibility was obtained through Lin's concordance correlation coefficient by using the statistical package STATA™ for Windows. Results. Average age was 38.8 (SD: 9.9) and 61.6 % were female patients. 125 pairs of matched radiographs for 1000 measurements were evaluated. Overall reproducibility between the methods for mesial and distal measurements were 0.62 (95% CI: 0.55-0.70) and 0.64 (95% CI: 0.57-0.71) respectively. Conclusions. Reproducibility between methods was considered poor, including subgroup analysis, therefore, reproducibility between methods is minimal. Usage of these methods in periodontics should be made implementing the whole knowledge of the technical features and the advantages of these systems.

Keywords : Reproducibility of Results; Periodontics; Digital Dental Radiography; Epidemiology.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in English     · English ( pdf )