...
首页> 外文期刊>The Internet Journal of Dental Science >Comparison Of Dental Age Of Hubli Dharwad Children By Moore's Method With The Skeletal Age And Chronological Age
【24h】

Comparison Of Dental Age Of Hubli Dharwad Children By Moore's Method With The Skeletal Age And Chronological Age

机译:用摩尔法将哈勃利·达瓦儿童的牙齿年龄与骨骼年龄和年代年龄进行比较

获取原文
           

摘要

The developmental status of a child is usually assessed in relation to physical events that take place during the progress of growth. Although growth events occur in reasonably constant sequences, the ages at which they are reached vary considerably among children. The various biological ages commonly used are dental age, chronological age, skeletal age, secondary sexual characteristics and morphological age but one expression cannot denote the complexity of growth and development. This study is an attempt to compare the dental age with the chronological age and the skeletal age. Introduction The growth of children has long fascinated poets, parents and pediatricians but the diversity in the expressions has left us unsatisfied. The developmental status of a child is usually assessed in relation to physical events that take place during the progress of growth. Although growth events occur in reasonably constant sequences, the ages at which they are reached vary considerably among children.Age determination plays an important role in pediatric medicine, endocrinology, pediatric dentistry and orthodontics Review of Literature Pryor (1907)1 conducted studies on the skeletal development of the hand and wrist by means of X-rays and was the first one to suggest the skeletal precocity of the females as compared to males. Todd (1937) 2 suggested a method of determining the skeletal age based on the appearance of the joint surfaces, the size relationships, and the shape of the bones in the metaphyseal-epiphyseal regions and other centers of ossification in the hand and wrist radiograph Nolla (1960)3 suggested a method for assessment of the age of immature dentitions from radiographs based on a serial study of fifty children. Points were awarded to each tooth on a scale ranging from one point when only the crypt is seen and the calcification has not commenced to ten points when the apex is just completed. The sum of the points of the whole dentition gave the age assessment. Moorees, Fanning and Hunt (1963)4 published charts based on a radiographic survey which gives details of the development of both the deciduous and the permanent dentition. The Moorees, Fanning and Hunt charts provide more information on the individual stages of development for each tooth and have the advantage of providing separate charts for each sex. Ranta N.M. (1988)5 aimed to check if the dental maturity charts made in southern Finland can be used without modifications in other parts of the country. Demirjians method was used to estimate dental maturity. They suggested differences in dental maturity within a fairly homogeneous population, which should be considered when national charts are used. Marks (1992)6 assessed and quantified the differences in two regionally distinct orthodontic series with regard to average tooth mineralization and tooth eruption ages. The scoring was done according to the stages defined by Moorees, Fanning and Hunt. The hand wrist films were scored according to the 11 grade system of Fishman. Statistical comparisons suggested difference in the average tempos of development between midsouth (Tennessee) and Midwest (Ohio) samples of adolescent white orthodontic patients, the midsouth series being comparatively delayed in all formative and eruptive phases tested. . Prabhakar A.R., Panda A.K., Raju O.S. (2002) 7 studied the maturity scores of the 78 males and 73 females and were converted to obtain dental age using the Demirjian's conversion chart. The chronologic age, skeletal age and the obtained dental age were compared using the student's test. .The obtained dental age was found to be overestimated in children of Davangere. An overestimation of 120±1.02 years and 0.90±0.87 years was found in males and females respectively, indicating that Demirjian's method did not give accurate age assessment in the children of Davanagere.. Though various studies have been conducted in Western population to assess the various biological ages individuall
机译:通常根据成长过程中发生的身体事件来评估儿童的发育状况。尽管生长事件以合理恒定的顺序发生,但达到这些年龄的年龄在儿童中差别很大。通常使用的各种生物学年龄是牙齿年龄,年代年龄,骨骼年龄,继发性特征和形态年龄,但是一种表达不能表示生长和发育的复杂性。这项研究试图将牙齿年龄与按年龄排列的年龄和骨骼年龄进行比较。简介儿童的成长使诗人,父母和儿科医生长期着迷,但表达方式的多样性使我们不满意。通常根据成长过程中发生的身体事件来评估儿童的发育状况。尽管生长事件以合理的恒定顺序发生,但儿童的年龄却相差很大。年龄确定在儿科医学,内分泌学,儿科牙科和正畸学中起着重要作用文献综述Pryor(1907)1对骨骼进行了研究通过X射线检查手和腕骨的发育情况,这是第一个表明女性比男性早熟的骨骼。 Todd(1937)2提出了一种方法,该方法根据关节和手的X线片Nolla的干surfaces端-上pi骨区域和其他骨化中心的关节表面,大小关系和骨骼形状来确定骨骼年龄。 (1960)3提出了一种方法,该方法基于对五十个孩子的系列研究,通过射线照片评估了未成熟牙列的年龄。从仅看到隐窝且钙化未开始时的一个点到刚完成顶点时的十个点的范围,将分数授予每个牙齿。整个牙列的总和给出了年龄评估。 Moorees,Fanning和Hunt(1963)4基于放射照相调查发布了图表,其中详细介绍了乳牙和永久牙列的发育情况。摩尔,扇形和亨特图表提供了有关每个牙齿各个发育阶段的更多信息,并具有为每种性别提供单独图表的优点。 Ranta N.M.(1988)5的目的是检查芬兰南部地区是否可以使用未经修改的牙科成熟度表。使用Demirjians方法估计牙齿的成熟度。他们建议在相当均质的人群中牙齿成熟度的差异,使用国家图表时应考虑这些差异。 Marks(1992)6评估并量化了两个区域不同的正畸系列在平均牙齿矿化和牙齿萌出年龄方面的差异。根据Moorees,Fanning和Hunt定义的阶段进行评分。根据Fishman的11年级系统对手腕电影进行评分。统计比较表明,青春期白人正畸患者的中南部(田纳西州)和中西部(俄亥俄州)样品的平均发育速度有所不同,中南部系列在所有测试的形成和喷发阶段均相对延迟。 。 Prabhakar A.R.,Panda A.K.,Raju O.S. (2002年)7研究了78位男性和73位女性的成熟度得分,并使用Demirjian转换表将其转换为牙齿年龄。使用学生测验比较年代,骨骼年龄和获得的牙齿年龄。 。发现获得的牙齿年龄在Davangere儿童中被高估了。男性和女性分别被高估了120±1.02岁和0.90±0.87岁,这表明Demirjian的方法并未对Davanagere的孩子进行准确的年龄评估。尽管在西方人群中进行了各种研究以评估各种生物学年龄个体

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号