Relation between anthropometric and cephalometric measurements and proportions of the face of healthy young white adult men and women.

Abstract

The specific aim of this study was to determine the differences between 6 anthropometric (taken from the surface) and cephalometric (taken from x-rays) measurements and 12 proportion indices formed by the measurements obtained from the face of 51 healthy Caucasoid young adult males and females. The z-score analysis revealed negligible differences in frequency of normal values, in surface measurements 97.4% (298 of 306) versus 96.7% (296 of 306) in cephalometric ones. The optimal normal measurements dominated, in males in 76.8% and in females in 80.8%. The mean values of the 6 linear measurements, taken from the surface and the cephalogram of the face were in equal number similar and significantly dissimilar in both sexes (Table 1). Comparison of the mean anthropometric and cephalometric proportion indices did not show significant differences in the two sexes (Table 2). For males 50% of the 12 proportions the indices were similar and 50% were significantly different. For females the frequency of similar proportions was seen in 33.3% and in 66.7% moderately-severely differing, statistically not significant. The z-score analysis identified subnormal measurements on the facial surface in 2.6% (8 of 306) and in cephalometric ones in 3.3% (10 of 306). The subnormal measurements of mild and moderate degree disclosed on the skeleton were not detected on the surface and some of the severely subnormal ones became mild-moderate on the skin surface. The study showed that the vertical anthropometric and cephalometric measurements in the facial profile were in highly significant percentage normal when compared with their normative data established for healthy populations. Generally, the cephalometric normal measurements were smaller than those of the anthropometric ones, some of them significantly. The significant differences between the proportions on the surface and skeleton in healthy subjects advice to be cautious in clinical practice, to judge the morphological changes of the face separately on the surface and on the skeleton of the patient.