An in vitro evaluation of the reliability and validity of an electronic pantograph by testing with five different articulators.
BACKGROUND
The degree of reliability and validity of a new electronic pantographic instrument, the Cadiax Compact, has not been established.


OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to test the reliability and validity of the electronic pantograph in calculating condylar settings for 5 different articulators (Denar D5A, Denar Mark II, Whip Mix 8500, Hanau Modular, and Panadent PCH).


METHODS
Pantograph sensors were mounted to each articulator with custom-made mounting devices. Border movements were made on each articulator with known condylar settings to produce readings at 3-, 5-, and 10-mm condylotrack distances. The condylar settings investigated included horizontal condylar inclination (HCI), immediate mandibular lateral translation (IMLT), progressive mandibular lateral translation (PMLT), top wall, and rear wall. Reliability was assessed by the relative size of standard deviations. Validity was tested with 1-way analysis of variance and the Tukey HSD Test (alpha=.05).


RESULTS
The reliability readings for the condylar settings at the 10-mm condylotrack distance, for the most part, were more consistent than those at the 5-mm distance, which, in turn, were more consistent than those at the 3-mm distance. When there were exceptions to this trend, the differences in standard deviations were very small (0.006 mm for IMLT, 0.03 and 0.12 degrees for HCI). When comparing validity between the condylotrack distances, the smallest deviations, in general, were found at the 10-mm distance, the next smallest at the 5-mm distance, and the largest, at the 3-mm distance for HCI. For PMLT, in general, the 10-mm and 5-mm deviations were smaller than the 3-mm deviation. For IMLT, there was no significant difference between the 3-, 5-, and 10-mm deviations. In analyzing validity between the articulators, the smallest deviations from the preset values, in general, were found with the Denar Mark II.


CONCLUSIONS
The standard deviations for assessing reliability and the mean deviations for assessing validity were both relatively small in comparison to the average values of the condylar determinants. Therefore, the electronic pantograph was determined to be both reliable and valid.
Chang
Willy S W
WS
Department of Restorative Dentistry, Baltimore College of Dental Surgery, Dental School, University of Maryland, 21201, USA.
Romberg
Elaine
E
Driscoll
Carl F
CF
Tabacco
Michael J
MJ
D000704:Analysis of Variance; D003725:Dental Articulators; D003768:Dental Occlusion, Centric; D004582:Electronics, Medical; D006801:Humans; D007574:Jaw Relation Record / Q000295:instrumentation*; D008334:Mandible / Q000502:physiology; D008335:Mandibular Condyle; D009068:Movement; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric