AI Summary & Key Takeaways
AI InsightThere was no statisticallysignificant difference between males and females (p>0.05).Conclusion: It was found that the profile photograph was more preferred and informative in determining the sagittal maxillofacialproblem.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
Özet
Objective: The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the profile and frontal photographs in determining sagittalmaxillofacial problems by the panel members created from different professional groups.Methods: Frontal and profile photographs of four individuals with skeletal Class I, Class II Division 1, Class II Division 2, and Class IIImalocclusion were assessed by panel members. A total of 42 panel members from 7 different professions participated in the study.Panel members were asked to choose one of the frontal or profile photographs to be used in determining the maxillofacial problem.Mann-Whitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and Fisher’s exact test were applied to evaluate the difference between the panelists.Results: Of the 42 panel members, 16% selected frontal photographs, and 84% selected profile photographs. There were no statis-tically significant differences between seven panels with regard to photography selection (p>0.05). When all panel members werecompared with regard to gender, 17.9% of the frontal photographs and 82.1% of the profile photographs were selected by females,whereas 15.4% of the frontal photographs and 84.6% of the profile photographs were chosen by males. There was no statisticallysignificant difference between males and females (p>0.05).Conclusion: It was found that the profile photograph was more preferred and informative in determining the sagittal maxillofacialproblem.