Bolton's analysis using a photogrammetric method on occlusal photographs

Abstract

Purpose The aim of the study is to present a photogrammetric technique using standardized occlusal photographs to perform Bolton’s analysis and assess reliability of this new method with plaster study casts. Materials and Methods The study was conducted on 16 subjects (8 males, 8 females), aged 18-25 years. Standardized occlusal photographs and plaster study casts were obtained. The occlusal photographs were calibrated in Nemoceph® software. Mesio-distal dimensions of all teeth up to first molars were calculated and Bolton’s analysis was performed. Similarly, a digital calliper with 0.1 mm sensitivity was used to measure mesio-distal dimensions of all teeth on plaster study casts to perform Bolton’s analysis. 28 parameters were measured on study models and corresponding occlusal photographs. Paired t test and intraclass correlation tests were carried out to test validity and reliability of the photogrammetric method. An intraclass correlation test was calculated for 4 derived parameters to test reliability of Bolton’s analysis measurements obtained from occlusal photographs as compared to study models. Results All 28 parameters showed a statistically significant and excellent correlation (r>.80) in the Intra Class Correlation test. 4 variables used to calculate Bolton’s analysis showed statistically significant correlation (r>.96) in the intraclass correlation test. Conclusion Photogrammetry is a reliable tool to measure mesio-distal tooth size. Bolton’s analysis from standardized occlusal photographs using the described photogrammetric technique can be used as an effective clinical tool.

Keywords

• Photogrammetry
• Bolton’s analysis
• Ophotograph
• Nemoceph
• Tooth dimensions

References

1. 1. Mah J. The evolution of digital study models. J Clin Orthod 2007;41:557-61.
2. 2. Fleming PS, Marinho V, Johal A. Orthodontic measurements on digital study models compared with plaster models: a systematic review. Orthod Craniofac Res 2011;14:1-6. [CrossRef]
3. 3. McGuinness NJ, Stephens CD. Storage of orthodontic study models in hospital units in the U.K. Br J Orthod 1992;19:227-32. [CrossRef]
4. 4. Rheude B, Sadowsky PL, Ferriera A, Jacobson A. An evaluation of the use of digital study models in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. Angle Orthod 2005;75:300-4.
5. 5. Stevens DR, Flores-Mir C, Nebbe B, Raboud DW, Heo G, Major PW. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of plaster vs digital study models: comparison of peer assessment rating and Bolton analysis and their constituent measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;129:794-803. [CrossRef]
6. 6. Prakash A, Pulgaonkar R, Chitra P. A new combination mirror with template for intraoral photography. J Indian Orthod Soc 2016;50:61-2. [CrossRef]
7. 7. Tomassetti JJ, Taloumis LJ, Denny JM, Fischer JR Jr. A comparison of 3 computerized Bolton tooth-size analyses with a commonly used method. Angle Orthod 2001;71:351-7.
8. 8. Mullen SR, Martin CA, Ngan P, Gladwin M. Accuracy of space analysis with emodels and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:346-52. [CrossRef]

9. 9. Sonwane S, Kumar BS, Shweta RK, Rajput D, Chokotiya H. Reliability of bolton teeth ratio in dual pour alginate impression with plaster and digital models. Indian J Orthod Dentofac Res 2016;2:115-8.
10. 10. Nalcaci R, Topcuoglu T, Ozturk F. Comparison of Bolton analysis and tooth size measurements obtained using conventional and three-dimensional orthodontic models. Eur J Dent 2013;7(Suppl 1):S66-70.
11. 11. Gholston LR. Reliability of an intraoral camera: utility for clinical dentistry and research. Am J Orthod 19841;85:89-93. [CrossRef]
12. 12. Normando D, da Silva PL, Mendes ÁM. A clinical photogrammetric method to measure dental arch dimensions and mesio-distal tooth size. Eur J Orthod 2011;33:721-6. [CrossRef]
13. 13. Bille JF, Costa JB, Müller F. Optical Quality of the Human Eye: The Quest for Perfect Vision. In: Bille JF, Harner CFH, Loesel FH (eds) Abberation-Free Refractive Surgery. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2003; pp: 25-46. [CrossRef]