To identify cephalometric norms for a Jordanian population.
Design
A cross sectional study using a sample selected on the basis of a balanced face and a Class I occlusion.
Materials and Methods
65 subjects aged 14–17 years were selected from a larger sample on the basis of Class I incisors, a balanced profile and no previous orthodontic treatment. Lateral skull radiographs were digitised directly to produce values for SNA, SNB, ANB, UI/MX, LI/MN, UI/LI, MMPA and LI/A-Pog.
Results
SNA and SNB were very close to the Eastman Standards. MMPA was significantly lower in Jordanians whilst UI/MX and LI/MN were significantly higher. Lower incisors were 4•6mm further forward in relation to A-Pog in Jordanians.
AltmanD. G. (1991) Practical Statistics for Medical Research, Chapman and Hall, London.
2.
BallardC. F. (1956) Morphology and treatment of Class II division 2 occlusions, Transactions of the European Orthodontic Society, pp. 44–55.
3.
BisharaS. E. (1981) Longitudinal cephalometric standards from 5 years of age to adulthood, American Journal of Orthodontics, 79, 35–44.
4.
BjorkA. (1947) The face in profile, Svensk Tandlakare Tidskrift, 40, No. 5B.
5.
BroadbentB. H.Sr, BroadbentB. H.Jr and GoldenW. H (1975) Bolton Standards of Dentofacial Development Growth,Mosby Year Book, St Louis.
6.
ChanG. K. H. (1972) A cephalometric appraisal of the Chinese (Cantonese), American Journal of Orthodontics, 61, 279–285.
7.
ChristieT. E. (1977) Cephalometric patterns of adults with normal occlusion, Angle Orthodontist, 47, 128–134.
8.
CookeM. S. and WeiS. H. Y (1988) Intersex differences in craniocervical morphology and posture in Southern Chinese and British Caucasian subjects, American Journal of Physiology and Anthropology, 7, 43–51.
9.
DownsW. B. (1948) Variations in facial relationships: their significance in treatment and prognosis, American Journal of Orthodontics, 34, 812–840.
10.
GianellyA. A. (1970) Age and sex cephalometric norms, American Journal of Orthodontics, 57, 497–501.
11.
GordonP. H. and TurnerP. J. (1999) Gela Program Environment, Version GLP 1.27
12.
HamdanA. M. (2001) Prevalence of malocclusion in 16 year old Jordanian school children, Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology (in press).
13.
HoustonW. J. B. (1983) The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurement, American Journal of Orthodontics, 83, 382–390.
14.
MacAllisterM. J. and RockW. P. (1992) The Eastman Standard incisor angulations: are they still appropriate?British Journal of Orthodontics, 19, 55–58.
15.
MillsJ. R. E. (1982) Principles and Practice of Orthodontics,Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh.
16.
McNamaraJ. A.Jr. and EllisE. (1988) Cephalometric analysis of untreated adults with ideal facial and occlusal relationships, International Journal of Adult Orthodontics and Orthognathic Surgery, 3, 221–231.
17.
MoyersR. E. (1988) Handbook of Orthodontics, 4th edn, Year Book Medical Publishers Inc., Chicago.
18.
PeckH. and PeckS. (1970) A concept of facial aesthetics, Angle Orthodontist, 40, 284–306.
19.
RiedelR. A. (1950) Esthetics and its relation to orthodontic therapy, Angle Orthodontist, 20, 168–178.
20.
RiedelR. A. (1957) An analysis of dentofacial relationships, American Journal of Orthodontics, 43, 103–119.
21.
RioloM. L., MoyersR. E., McNamaraJ. A. and HunterW. S (1974) Cephalometric Standards from the University School Growth Study, Craniofacial Growth Series, Monograph No. 2, Centre for Human Growth and Development, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
22.
SandlerP. J. (1988) Reproducibility of cephalometric measurements, British Journal of Orthodontics, 15, 105–110.
23.
SteinerC. C (1953) Cephalometrics for you and me, American Journal of Orthodontics, 39, 729–755.
24.
StirrupsD. R. (1993) Guidance on presentation of cephalometry-based research studies. A personal perspective, British Journal of Orthodontics, 20, 359–365.
25.
TaylorW. H. and HitchcockH. P. (1966) The Alabama Analysis, American Journal of Orthodontics, 52, 245–265.
