Subscribe to RSS
To Establish Cephalometric Floating Norms as a Guide toward Harmonious Cranial Individual Pattern among North Indian Adults
Introduction Floating norms put us at ease while diagnosing and establishing a treatment plan for an individual with abnormal skeletal pattern. It uses the variability of the associations among appropriate cephalometric variables and later on the basis of a regression model by combination of both skeletal parameters which are sagittal and vertical and construct a harmony box which make diagnosis straightforward. This study aims to establish floating cephalometric norms for the describing individual craniofacial skeletal pattern among North Indian Adults as an additional diagnostic tool for orthodontic treatment planning.
Materials and Methods The study includes North Indian adults in age range of 17 to 25 years. A total of 30 patients were selected and were subjected to cephalometric evaluation. Various angular measurements viz., SNB (sella-nasion-point B), NL-NSL (maxillary line-nasion sella line), ML-NSL (mandibular line-nasion sella line), N–S–Ba (nasion-sella-basion), SNA (sella-nasion-point A), and ML-NL (mandibular line-maxillary line) were considered for designing harmony box for North Indian adults.
Results The results of the study were subjected to various statistical analyses. SNB served as the independent variable and NL-NSL, NSBa, ML-NSL, ML-NL, and SNA were made the dependent variable due to lesser R2 values in multiple regression analysis. Correlation between some of the variables, such as (SNA–SNB, ML-NSL–NL-NSL, and ML-NSL–ML-NL), in the present North Indian sample showed positive correlation among each other and were statistically significant (p = 0.000). When compared with the other similar studies done previously, least variability was seen with the Segner study and maximum variability was seen with Thilander’s study.
Conclusion The analysis of the individual craniofacial pattern by means of floating norms appears to provide a helpful method in determining the parameters responsible for the skeletal disharmony, thus representing a viable option for additional diagnostic tool in orthodontic and orthopaedic/surgical treatment planning.
05 August 2020 (online)
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.
A-12, Second Floor, Sector -2, NOIDA -201301, India
- 1 Broadbent BH. A new x-ray technique and its application to orthodontia. Angle Orthod 1931; 1: 45-66
- 2 Hofrath H. Die bedeutung der röntgenfern-und abstandsaufnahme für die diagnostik der kieferanomalien. Fortschritte der Orthodontik in Theorie und Praxis. 1931; 1: 231-258
- 3 Proffit WR, Phillips C, Douvartzidis N. A comparison of outcomes of orthodontic and surgical-orthodontic treatment of Class II malocclusion in adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992; 101 (06) 556-565
- 4 Tahir E, Sadowsky C, Schneider BJ. An assessment of treatment outcome in American Board of Orthodontics cases. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997; 111 (03) 335-342
- 5 Alcalde RE, Jinno T, Pogrel MA, Matsumura T. Cephalometric norms in Japanese adults. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1998; 56 (02) 129-134
- 6 Athanasiou AE. Orthodontic Cephalometry. London, United Kingdom: Mos By-wolfe; 1997
- 7 Solow B. The pattern of craniofacial associations: a morphological and methodological correlation and factor analysis study on young male adults. Acta Odontol Scand 1967. Doi 10.1016/0002-9416(67)90010-3
- 8 Sevilla-Naranjilla MA, Rudzki-Janson I. Cephalometric floating norms as a guide toward a harmonious individual craniofacial pattern among Filipinos. Angle Orthod 2009; 79 (06) 1162-1168
- 9 Nanda RS, Ghosh J. Facial soft tissue harmony and growth in orthodontic treatment. Semin Orthod 1995; 1 (02) 67-81
- 10 Di Paolo RJ, Philip C, Maganzini AL, Hirce JD. The quadrilateral analysis: an individualized skeletal assessment. Am J Orthod 1983; 83 (01) 19-32
- 11 Steiner CC. Cephalometrics in clinical practice. Angle Orthod 1959; 29: 8-29
- 12 Tweed CH. The Frankfort-mandibular incisor angle (FMIA) in orthodontic diagnosis, treatment planning and prognosis. Angle Orthod 1954; 24: 121-169
- 13 Hasund A, Böe OE. Floating norms as guidance for the position of the lower incisors. Angle Orthod 1980; 50 (03) 165-168
- 14 Järvinen S. An analysis of the variation of the ANB angle: a statistical appraisal. Am J Orthod 1985; 87 (02) 144-146
- 15 Segner D. Floating norms as a means to describe individual skeletal patterns. Eur J Orthod 1989; 11 (03) 214-220
- 16 Segner D, Hasund A. Individualisierte Kephalometrie. 3rd ed. Hamburg, Germany: Segner verlag & vertreb; 1998
- 17 Franchi L, Baccetti T, McNamara JA Jr. Cephalometric floating norms for North American adults. Angle Orthod 1998; 68 (06) 497-502
- 18 Ngarmprasertchai S. Vergleich der dento-kraniofazialen Morphologie zweier ethnischer Gruppen mit eugnathem Gebiss im Fernröntgenseitenbild (Doctoral dissertation) lmu; 2002
- 19 Mahaini L. Kraniofaziale Strukturen syrischer und deutscher Probanden (Doctoral dissertation) lmu;2005
- 20 Tollaro I, Baccetti T, Franchi L. Floating norms for the assessment of craniofacial pattern in the deciduous dentition. Eur J Orthod 1996; 18 (04) 359-365
- 21 Lavergne J, Gasson N. Analysis and classification of the rotational growth pattern without implants. Br J Orthod 1982; 9 (01) 51-56
- 22 Jacobson A. Radiographic Cephalometry. Kimberly Dr.: Quintessence Publishing Co; 1995
- 23 Bjork A. Variationer i kaebernes relation til det ovrige kranjum. In: Lundstrom A Nordisk larbok i odontologisk ortopedi. Stockholm; 1958
- 24 Thilander B, Persson M, Skagius S. Roentgencephalometric standards for the facial skeleton and soft tissue profile of Swedish children and young adults. II. Comparisons with earlier Scandinavian normative data. Swed Dent J Suppl 1982; 15: 219-228