DMFR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Devlin, C. V.
Right arrow Articles by Devlin, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Devlin, C. V.
Right arrow Articles by Devlin, H.

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Vol 30, Issue 2 120-125, Copyright © 2001 by British Institute of Radiology

ARTICLES

Variability in measurement of radiomorphometric indices by general dental practitioners

C. V. Devlin, K. Horner and H. Devlin
University Dental Hospital of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the variability of general dental practitioners (GDPs) in measurement of radiomorphometric indices on panoramic radiographs following basic instruction and to examine whether the variability could be reduced by more individualised instruction. METHODS: Nine GDPs measured Gonion Index (GI), Antegonion Index (AI), Mental Index (MI) and Mandibular Cortical Index (MCI) on copies of 10 panoramic radiographs following a lecture on osteoporosis and the use of radiomorphometric indices. Their measurements were related to expert-derived measurements of the same copy radiographs. Mean differences and limits of agreement (2x standard deviation of differences) were calculated for quantitative indices (GI, AI, MI) and agreement of GDPs with expert-derived MCI assessments was determined using weighted kappa. Following individualised feedback to GDPs, all measurements were repeated after 2 weeks and the statistical analysis repeated. RESULTS: There was extensive variation amongst GDPs in measurement of GI, AI and MI and in assessment of MCI. There was a general tendency of GDPs to record thicker mandibular cortices than did the experts. Limits of agreement were wide relative to the mean values of each quantitative index at both readings. Agreement of the GDPs with experts in assessment of MCI was moderate at both readings, but with a wide range in assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Variability in measuring radiomorphometric indices amongst the GDPs was high and was not predictably improved by individualised instruction. This study casts considerable doubt on the potential value of radiomorphometric indices given their lack of precision.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Dentomaxillofac RadiolHome page
K Gungor, Z. Akarslan, M Akdevelioglu, H Erten, and M Semiz
The precision of the panoramic mandibular index
Dentomaxillofac. Radiol., November 1, 2006; 35(6): 442 - 446.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Dentomaxillofac RadiolHome page
P Sutthiprapaporn, A Taguchi, T Nakamoto, M Ohtsuka, P. Mallick, M Tsuda, I Kodama, Y Kudo, Y Suei, and K Tanimoto
Diagnostic performance of general dental practitioners after lecture in identifying post-menopausal women with low bone mineral density by panoramic radiographs.
Dentomaxillofac. Radiol., July 1, 2006; 35(4): 249 - 252.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING ALL BIR JOURNALS
Copyright © 2001 by the British Institute of Radiology.