Related Experiment Videos
Comparison of recordings obtained with computerized axiography and mechanical pantography at 2 time intervals
Cynthia S Petrie1, Gerald D Woolsey, Karen Williams
1University of Missouri-Kansas City, School of Dentistry, Department of Restorative Dentistry, Kansas City, MO 64108, USA. petriec@umkc.edu
Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to compare recordings of mandibular movements obtained with a Denar mechanical pantograph to those obtained with a Denar computerized axiograph (Cadiax compact).
Materials And Methods:
Pantographic recordings and computerized axiograms were collected on 10 subjects. All of the subjects had intact dentition and no clinical signs or symptoms of temporomandibular dysfunction. Tracings produced with the 2 instruments were compared using pantographic reproducibility indices (PRIs). Recordings with each instrument were repeated twice and assessed for consistency. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to compare PRI scores obtained with the pantograph and the axiograph. Recordings with both instruments were repeated 2 weeks to 1 month later, and new PRI scores were calculated. Consistency between initial and second PRI scores for each instrument was assessed using a coefficient of stability.
Results:
The coefficients of stability between the initial and second recordings were r = 0.91 for mechanical pantography and r = -0.06 for computerized axiography. Comparison of recordings made by mechanical pantography and computerized axiography at the initial and second recordings showed poor concordance, with coefficients of 0.23 and -0.11, respectively.
Conclusions:
PRI scores recorded with the mechanical pantograph were consistent between the initial and second recordings. In contrast, recordings with the computerized axiograph appeared highly inconsistent across time. PRI scores calculated from the axiographs were significantly higher than PRI scores calculated from pantographic tracings for the same subject.