Journal of Digital Imaging

, Volume 24, Issue 3, pp 552–559 | Cite as

Quantitative Evaluation of Patient Movement during Simulated Acquisition of Cephalometric Radiographs

  • Kyung-Hoe Huh
  • Erika Benavides
  • Young-Tak Jo
  • Bo-Ram Choi
  • Won-Jin Yi
  • Min-Suk Heo
  • Sam-Sun Lee
  • Soon-Chul Choi


The objective of this study was to perform the quantitative three-dimensional analysis of the patients’ movements at the different time points during the simulated acquisition of cephalometric radiographs. Fifty-three subjects (32 men, 21 women) were divided into four groups according to their age (Group 1: 9–12, Group 2: 13–19, Group 3: 20–25, and Group 4: 26–30 years old). The experiment (Exp) consisted in providing the subjects with three different kinds of verbal instructions as follows; Exp 1: they were simply instructed not to move, Exp 2: detailed instructions were provided, and Exp 3: they were specifically instructed to clench their molars. The amount of their movement during the 20 s of the cephalomatric X-ray exposure was measured using an optical marker and tracker. The maximum movement was analyzed three-dimensionally at 0.5, 2, 5, 10, 15, and 20 s. There was minimal vibrating movement every 0.3–0.5 s and relatively large movement every 3–5 s. The youngest group showed the largest amount of movement among the four age groups, and their movement was more significant in the up and down direction (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the amount of movement according to the instructions. The longer exposure time showed the larger amount of the movement. Children can show the significant movements during X-ray taking, and the longer exposure time can also result in the larger movement during acquisition of cephalometric radiographs. Therefore, the shorter exposure time is recommended in order to improve image quality.

Key words

Digital radiography evaluation studies image blurring movement cephalometry 



We greatly appreciate Professor Shin-Jae Lee (School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) for his academic advice and assistance with the statistical analysis on this work. This study was supported by a grant of the Korea Healthcare technology R&D Project, Ministry for Health, Welfare & Family Affairs, Republic of Korea (A08-4491-AL2023-08N1-00030B).


  1. 1.
    Vandre RH, Webber RL: Future trends in dental radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 80:471–480, 1995PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wenzel A, Grondahl HG: Direct digital radiography in the dental office. Int Dent J 45:27–34, 1995PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sanderink GC, Miles DA: Intraoral detectors. CCD, CMOS TFT, and other devices. Dent Clin North Am 44:249–255, 2000PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Parks ET, Williamson GF: Digital radiography: an overview. J Cont Dent Pract 4:23–39, 2002Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hildebolt CF, Couture RA, Whiting BR: Dental photostimulable phosphor radiography. Dent Clin North Am 44:273–297, 2000PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kashima I: Computed radiography with photostimulable phosphor in oral and maxillofacial radiology. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 80:577–598, 1995PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schaefer-Prokop C, Uffmann M, Eisenhuber E, Prokop M: Digital Radiography of the Chest: Detector Techniques and Performance Parameters. J Thorac Imaging 18:124–137, 2003PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mupparapu M, Binder RE, Cummins JM, Feldman CA, Cappelli MA, Matheson PB: Implementation of a Digital Radiographic Image Acquisition and Retrieval System (DRIARS) using a wireless network in an orthodontic department. J Contemp Dent Pract 9:115–123, 2008PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wenger NA, Tewson DH, McDonald F: Direct digital lateral cephalometry: the effects of JPEG compression on image quality. Med Eng Phys 28:560–567, 2006PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gijbels F, Sanderink G, Wyatt J, Van Dam J, Nowak B, Jacobs R: Radiation doses of indirect and direct digital cephalometric radiography. Br Dent J 197:149–152, 2004PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li T, Schreibmann E, Yang Y, Xing L: Motion correction for improved target localization with on-board cone-beam computed tomography. Phys Med Biol 51:253–267, 2006PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Geelen W, Wenzel A, Gotfredsen E, Kruger M, Hansson LG: Reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks on conventional film, hardcopy, and monitor-displayed images obtained by the storage phosphor technique. Eur J Orthod 20:331–340, 1998PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sayinsu K, Isik F, Trakyali G, Arun T: An evaluation of the errors in cephalometric measurements on scanned cephalometric images and conventional tracings. Eur J Orthod 29:105–108, 2007PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bruntz LQ, Palomo JM, Baden S, Hans MG: A comparison of scanned lateral cephalograms with corresponding original radiographs. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 130:340–348, 2006PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schulze RK, Gloede MB, Doll GM: Landmark identification on direct digital versus film-based cephalometric radiographs: a human skull study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 122:635–642, 2002PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gijbels F, Bou Serhal C, Willems G, Bosmans H, Sanderink G, Persoons M, Jacobs R: Diagnostic yield of conventional and digital cephalometric images: a human cadaver study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 30:101–105, 2001PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Celik E, Polat-Ozsoy O: Toygar Memikoglu TU: Comparison of cephalometric measurements with digital versus conventional cephalometric analysis. Eur J Orthod 31:241–246, 2009PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    You M, Li X, Wang H, Zhang J, Wu H, Liu Y, Miao J, Zhu Z: Morphological variety of the soft palate in normal individuals: a digital cephalometric study. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 37:344–349, 2008PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Otake Y: Real-time mandibular movement analysis system using four-dimensional cranial bone model. Syst Comp Jpn 37:1216–1226, 2006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wilson EM, Green JR: The development of jaw motion for mastication. Early Hum Dev 85:303–311, 2009PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Imaging Informatics in Medicine 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kyung-Hoe Huh
    • 1
    • 2
  • Erika Benavides
    • 3
  • Young-Tak Jo
    • 1
  • Bo-Ram Choi
    • 1
  • Won-Jin Yi
    • 4
  • Min-Suk Heo
    • 1
    • 2
  • Sam-Sun Lee
    • 4
  • Soon-Chul Choi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology and Dental Research Institute, School of DentistrySeoul National UniversitySeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of Oral and Maxillofacial RadiologySeoul National University Dental HospitalSeoulSouth Korea
  3. 3.Division of Radiology, Department of Periodontics and Oral Medicine, School of DentistryUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  4. 4.Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology, BK21, and Dental Research Institute, School of DentistrySeoul National UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations