Publicado

2007-07-01

Experts' clinical diagnosis test as a gold standard for cephalometric evaluation of vertical facial excess

Diagnóstico clínico de expertos como patrón de oro para evaluación cefalométrica del exceso vertical facial

Palabras clave:

Cephalometry, vertical dimension, physical examination (en)
Cefalometría, técnicas y procedimientos diagnósticos, dimensión vertical, examen físico (es)

Descargas

Autores/as

  • Salomón Yezioro Rubinsky Facultad de Odontología y Facultad de Medicina. Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
  • Javier Eslava-Schmalbach Facultad de Odontología y Facultad de Medicina. Universidad Nacional de Colombia.

Objective Cephalometric measures are used to evaluate vertical facial excess (VFE), however anyone of them have been validated against a gold standard to this purpose. Also, there are differences between cephalometric results and clinical evaluation. This study pretends to validate experts' clinical diagnosis test (ECDT) as gold standard for severe VFE, with the purpose of validating further against it the cephalometric measures results.
Methods. A consensus (Delphi method) was done to determine if ECDT could be used as gold standard for evident VFE (n=12 experts). A scale of 9 items was initially built from literature. Validity: A convenience sample was used (n=24), which were tested by 3 experts twice. Principal factor analysis was made. Internal consistency was evaluated with Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Inter-observer and intra-observer agreement was measured using Kendall concordance coefficient. ECDT's medians were compared between groups with VFE, using Kruskal Wallis test.
Results. Eleven of the twelve experts agreed that clinical diagnosis can be used as a gold standard for VFE. After Principal factor analysis a 6 items' scale was made. Internal consistency was high (Cronbach's alpha= 0.8051). ECDT's medians were different in groups with different qualitative appreciation of VFE by experts, in first (p<0.0001) and second evaluation (p<0.0001). A significant interobserver agreement was found (Kendall taub, p<0,01), and a significant intra-observer agreement too (Kendall tau-b, p<0.0005).
Conclusions. Experts' clinical diagnosis test (ECDT) could be used as gold standard for VFE. Later on, Cephalometric measures should be evaluated using the experts' clinical diagnosis as gold standard.

Objetivo. Aunque las medidas cefalométricas se utilizan para evaluar el exceso vertical facial (VFE), ninguna de ellas ha sido validada contra un patrón de oro. Además, hay diferencias entre los resultados cefalométricos y la evaluación clínica. Determinar si el diagnóstico clínico de expertos (ECDT) puede ser usado como prueba de oro en casos severos de exceso vertical facial (VFE)
Materiales y Métodos. Consenso de expertos (Método Delphi, n=12) para determinar si ECDT podría ser usado como prueba de oro en casos severos de VFE. Para ello se construyó escala con 9 características clínicas reportadas en la literatura. Validación: Muestra por conveniencia de 24 pacientes, evaluada por 3 expertos 2 veces. Se realizó análisis de Factores Principales. La consistencia interna fue evaluada con el Coeficiente alfa de Cronbach. La concordancia inter e intra-observador se evaluó con el coeficiente de concordancia Kendall. Las medianas de ECDT fueron comparados entre los grupos con y sin VFE usando la prueba de Kruskal Wallis.
Resultados. Once de doce expertos consensuaron que el diagnóstico clínico podría usarse como prueba de oro para VFE. Se elaboró una escala con 6 ítems, luego del análisis de factores principales. La consistencia interna fue alta (Cronbach's = 0.8051). Las medianas de ECDT fueron diferentes en los grupos con y sin VFE en la primera (p<0.0001) y segunda evaluación (p<0.0001). Hubo una alta concordancia interobservador (Kendall p<0,01), e intraobservador (Kendall p<0.0005).
Conclusiones. ECDT puede ser utilizado como prueba de oro para diagnosticar el exceso vertical facial severo.

Referencias

Jacobson A, Caufield PW. Introduction to Radiographic cephalometry. Philadelphia, PA :Lea & Febiger; 1985. p. 1-13.

Hixon EH. The norm concept and cephalometrics. Am. J. Orthod 1956; 42: 898-906.

Horowitz SL, Hixon EH. The nature of orthodontic diagnosis. Saint Louis, MO: The C.V.Mosby Company; 1966 .p. 299-302.

Ardila E. Estrategias Diagnósticas en epidemiología Clínica. Revista Facultad de Medicina Universidad Nacional de Colombia 1994; 42:157-165.

Browner WS NT, Cummings S. Designing a new study. In: Helley S, Cummings S, Browner W, Grady D. Chapter 9. N.H,editors. Designing Clinical Research. Philadelphia,PA, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2000.

Riegelman RK, Hirsch R. Cómo estudiar un estudio y probar una prueba: lectura crítica de la literatura médica. 3nd ed. Organización Panamericana de la Salud. 1998. p .110-122.

Hildebolt CF, Wardlaw DW, Smith RJ, Hertweck DW. Cephalometrics of anterior open bite: A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1992; 101:234-242.

Freudenthaler JW, Celar AG, Schneider B.. Overbite depth and anteroposterior dysplasia indicators: the relationship between oclusal and patterns using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. European Journal of Orthodontics 2000; 22(1): 75-83.

Unae KH, Young HK. Determination of Class II and Class III skeletal patterns: Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis on various cephalometric measurements. Am J Ortho Dentofacial Orthop 1998;113(5): 538-45.

Maercke AM, Eika B. What are the clinical skills levels of newly graduated physicians? Self - assessment study of an intended curriculum identified by a Delphi process. Medical Education 2002; 36: 472-478.

Steward J. Is the Delphi technique a qualitative method? Medical Education 2001; 35: 922-923.

Bishara ES. Textbook of Orthodontics. 1ra Editión, Philadelphia,PA: W.B Saunders Company; 2001.p.418.

Vaden JL, Pearson LE. Diagnosis of the vertical dimension. Seminars in Orthodontics 2002; 8: 120-129.

Subtelny JD. Early Orthodontic Treatment. 1ra Edition. Carol Stream, Illinois: Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc; 2000. p. 183-205.

Steiner C. Cephalometrics for you and me. Am. J. Orthod 1953; 39: 729 -755.

Sassouni V. Analysis of dentofacial vertical proportions. Am. J. Orthod 1964; 50: 801- 823.

McNamara JA. A method of cephalometric evaluation. Am. J. Orthod 1984; 86: 449 - 469.

Baik CY,Ververidou M. A new approach of assessing sagittal discrepancies:the Beta angle. Am J Ortho Dentofacial Orthop 2004; 126 (1):100-5.

Bradshaw CS, Morton AN, Garland SM, Horvath LB, Kuzevska I, Fairley CK. Evaluation of a point-of-care test, BVBlue, and clinical and laboratory criteria for diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis. J Clin Microbiol 2005; 43 (3):1304-8.

Cómo citar

APA

Yezioro Rubinsky, S. & Eslava-Schmalbach, J. (2007). Experts’ clinical diagnosis test as a gold standard for cephalometric evaluation of vertical facial excess. Revista de Salud Pública, 9(3), 399–407. https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/revsaludpublica/article/view/96497

ACM

[1]
Yezioro Rubinsky, S. y Eslava-Schmalbach, J. 2007. Experts’ clinical diagnosis test as a gold standard for cephalometric evaluation of vertical facial excess. Revista de Salud Pública. 9, 3 (jul. 2007), 399–407.

ACS

(1)
Yezioro Rubinsky, S.; Eslava-Schmalbach, J. Experts’ clinical diagnosis test as a gold standard for cephalometric evaluation of vertical facial excess. Rev. salud pública 2007, 9, 399-407.

ABNT

YEZIORO RUBINSKY, S.; ESLAVA-SCHMALBACH, J. Experts’ clinical diagnosis test as a gold standard for cephalometric evaluation of vertical facial excess. Revista de Salud Pública, [S. l.], v. 9, n. 3, p. 399–407, 2007. Disponível em: https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/revsaludpublica/article/view/96497. Acesso em: 13 feb. 2026.

Chicago

Yezioro Rubinsky, Salomón, y Javier Eslava-Schmalbach. 2007. «Experts’ clinical diagnosis test as a gold standard for cephalometric evaluation of vertical facial excess». Revista De Salud Pública 9 (3):399-407. https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/revsaludpublica/article/view/96497.

Harvard

Yezioro Rubinsky, S. y Eslava-Schmalbach, J. (2007) «Experts’ clinical diagnosis test as a gold standard for cephalometric evaluation of vertical facial excess», Revista de Salud Pública, 9(3), pp. 399–407. Disponible en: https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/revsaludpublica/article/view/96497 (Accedido: 13 febrero 2026).

IEEE

[1]
S. Yezioro Rubinsky y J. Eslava-Schmalbach, «Experts’ clinical diagnosis test as a gold standard for cephalometric evaluation of vertical facial excess», Rev. salud pública, vol. 9, n.º 3, pp. 399–407, jul. 2007.

MLA

Yezioro Rubinsky, S., y J. Eslava-Schmalbach. «Experts’ clinical diagnosis test as a gold standard for cephalometric evaluation of vertical facial excess». Revista de Salud Pública, vol. 9, n.º 3, julio de 2007, pp. 399-07, https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/revsaludpublica/article/view/96497.

Turabian

Yezioro Rubinsky, Salomón, y Javier Eslava-Schmalbach. «Experts’ clinical diagnosis test as a gold standard for cephalometric evaluation of vertical facial excess». Revista de Salud Pública 9, no. 3 (julio 1, 2007): 399–407. Accedido febrero 13, 2026. https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/revsaludpublica/article/view/96497.

Vancouver

1.
Yezioro Rubinsky S, Eslava-Schmalbach J. Experts’ clinical diagnosis test as a gold standard for cephalometric evaluation of vertical facial excess. Rev. salud pública [Internet]. 1 de julio de 2007 [citado 13 de febrero de 2026];9(3):399-407. Disponible en: https://revistas.unal.edu.co/index.php/revsaludpublica/article/view/96497

Descargar cita

Visitas a la página del resumen del artículo

43

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.