The clinical significance of error measurement in the interpretation of treatment results

The aims of this investigation were to determine the errors involved in cep halometric landmark identification and to link these to the interpretation of treatment results. Fifty cephalograms were randomly selected from patien t files and the following were determined. (i) Accuracy of the digitizer-si ngle tracing digitized on five occasions on each of 10 different positions on the digitizer by one observer. (ii) Intra- and inter-observer digitizing error-35 landmarks on the same tracing (on a fixed position) digitized on five occasions by each of four judges. (iii) Intra- and inter-observer trac ing error-five separate tracings of 10 different cephalograms by four judge s. There were no significant differences in the variances of the co-ordinates for each landmark between the different positions on the digitizer (mean va riance x-axis 0.07 mm and y-axis 0.08 mm). (ii) One-way ANOVA showed no sig nificant intra- or inter-observer differences in digitation. (iii) Levene's test for homogeneity of variance showed significant differences in the co- ordinates of different landmarks and between the same landmarks on differen t cephalograms. Two-way ANOVA showed significant differences between observ ers for the same landmark that were greater than the intra-observer differe nces. The results indicate that tracing accuracy is a limiting factor in cephalom etry. The variance of each landmark is dependent on the quality of the ceph alogram. Inter-observer differences were greater than intra-observer effect s and these were random, rather than systematic errors. Minimal error estim ation calculations enable discrimination between treatment results and meas urement errors.