论文部分内容阅读
目的 本文的研究目的在于比较前后两次拍摄的X线头颅侧位片上机械耳点与生理耳点自身重复性以及二者的相关关系。方法 :选择北医正畸科门诊睡眠呼吸暂停综合征的成年患者 2 8名 ,年龄 33— 6 5岁。治疗前后由专人拍摄定位X线头颅侧位片。在前后两次的头影测量描记图上建立直角坐标系 ,对生理耳点和机械耳点进行测量及统计学分析。结果及结论 :前后X机 ,Y机 ,Y生 的差异无显著性 ,X生 的差异虽然有显著性 ,但差值仅为 0 .5 893且X轴上的差异对FH的平面影响不大 ,因此此差异无临床意义。说明无论是生理耳点还是机械耳点其自身的重复性均很好。Y生 与Y机 以及FMIA生FH 与FMIA机FH比较差值的均数分别为 3.38和 2 .5 9,此差异有高度统计学意义及临床意义。两者不能相互替代。回归方程显示生理耳点与机械耳点之间存在明显的线性关系 ,并进一步表明两者不能相互替代。因此人为在应用X线头影测量分析时 ,应根据所选用的分析方法来确定选用生理耳点还是机械耳点 ,不应混用。
Purpose The purpose of this study is to compare the self-repetitive nature of the mechanical ear points and physiologic ear points of the X-ray cephalometric slices and the correlation between the two. METHODS: Twenty-eight adult patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome were selected from the Department of Orthodontics, aged 33-65 years. Before and after treatment by the shooting position X-ray cephalograms. Cartesian coordinate system was established on the fore-and-aft cephalometric trace to measure and analyze physiological ear points and mechanical ear points. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in X-ray, Y-ray and Y-ray before and after X-ray. Although the difference of X-ray was significant, the difference was only 0.59 893 and the X-axis difference had little effect on FH , So this difference is not clinically significant. It shows that both the physical ear point and the mechanical ear point have good repeatability. Y and Y machines and FMIA FH FH and FMIA machine FH mean difference were 3.38 and 2.59 respectively, this difference was highly statistically significant and clinical significance. The two can not substitute each other. The regression equation shows that there is a clear linear relationship between the physiological ear point and the mechanical ear point, and further shows that the two can not substitute each other. Therefore, the artificial application of cephalometric analysis, should be based on the analysis method used to determine the choice of physical or mechanical points of the ear, should not be mixed.