An evaluation of two VTO methods

Angle Orthodontist

Volumn 68, Issue 5, 1998, Pages 401-408

  Sample, Lew B ^a,b   Sadowsky, P Lionel ^b   Bradley, Edwin ^b  

^a University of Alabama ^*  (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM   (United States)

Author keywords

Cephalometrics; Correlation coefficient; Growth forecast; Prediction tracing; Visualized Treatment Objective

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; CEPHALOMETRY; CHILD; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FACE; FACIAL BONE; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; MALOCCLUSION; MAXILLOFACIAL DEVELOPMENT; METHODOLOGY; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; ORTHODONTICS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY; TOOTH EXTRACTION;

ADOLESCENT; CEPHALOMETRY; CHILD; FACE; FACIAL BONES; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MALOCCLUSION, ANGLE CLASS II; MAXILLOFACIAL DEVELOPMENT; ORTHODONTICS, CORRECTIVE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; TOOTH EXTRACTION;

EID: 0032186256     PISSN: 00033219     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Baumrind S. Prediction in the planning and conduct of orthodontic treatment. In: Melson B, ed. Current controversies in orthodontics. Chicago: Quintessance, 1991:25-43.
2. Ricketts RM. Cephalometric synthesis: An exercise in stating objectives and planning treatment with tracings of the head roentgenogram. Am J Orthod 1960; 46:647-673.
3. Ricketts RM. Planning treatment on the basis of the facial pattern and an estimate of its growth. Angle Orthod 1957;27:14-37.
4. Bench RW. The visual treatment objective: Orthodontics' most effective treatment planning tool. Proc Found Ortho Res 1971;4:165-195.
5. Magness WB. The mini-visualized treatment objective. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1987;91:361-374.
6. Myerson RC, Katona T. Cephalometric VTO. J Clin Orthod 1980;14:58-61.
7. Steiner CC. Cephalometrics for you and me. Am J Orthod 1953;39:729-755.
8. Jacobson A, Sadowsky PL. A visualized treatment objective. J Clin Orthod 1980;14:554-571.
9. Holdaway RA. A soft-tissue cephalometric analysis and its use in orthodontic treatment planning. Part I. Am J Orthod 1983;84:1-28.
10. Holdaway RA. A soft-tissue cephalometric analysis and its use in orthodontic treatment planning. Part II. Am J Orthod 1984;85:279-293.
11. Sarver DM. Video imaging - a computer facilitated approach to communication and planning in orthognathic surgery. Brit J Orthod 1993;20:187-191.
12. Sarver DM. Video cephalometric diagnosis (VCD): A new concept in treatment planning? Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1996;110:128-126.
13. Sarver DM, Johnston MW, Matukas VJ. Video imaging for planning and counseling in orthognathic surgery. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1988;46:939-945.
14. Ackerman JL, Proffit WR. Communication in orthodontic treatment planning: Bioethical and informed consent issues. Angle Orthod 1995;65:253-261.
15. Johnston LE. A statistical evaluation of cephlometric prediction. Angle Orthod 1968;38:284-304.
16. Thames TL, Sinclair PM, Alexander RG. The accuracy of computerized growth prediction in Class II high-angle cases. Am J Orthod 1985;87:398-405.
17. Cangialosi TJ, Chung JM, Elliott DF, Meistrell ME. Reliability of computer-generated prediction tracing. Angle Orthod 1995;65:277-284.
18. Maull DJ. A descriptive analysis of Class II treatment in peer reviewed cases (thesis). University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1995.
19. Tweed CH. The Frankfurt mandibular incisor angle (FMIA) in orthodontic diagnosis, treatment planning, and prognosis. Angle Orthod 1954;24:121-169.
20. Merrifield LL. The profile line as an aid in critically evaluating facial esthetics. Am J Orthod 1966;52:804-822.
21. Downs WB. Analysis of the dentofacial profile. Angle Orthod 1956;26:191-212.
22. Williams RW. The diagnostic line. Am J Orthod 1969;55:458-476.
23. Wylie WL. The mandibular incisor: Its role in facial esthetics. Angle Orthod 1955;25:32-41.
24. Yogosawa F. Predicting soft tissue profile changes concurrent with orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod 1990;60:199-206.