Comparison of manual vs. Digital cephalometric tracing

Cephalometry is an essential tool in orthodontics for assessing skeletal, dental, and soft tissue relationships. Traditionally, it was performed manually, but with technological advancements, digital tracing software has become available, promising greater speed and reproducibility. Objective: To compare manual and digital cephalometric tracing in terms of accuracy, reproducibility, time, cost, and clinical impact. Materials and methods: This study is a narrative review of literature in English and Spanish based on information collected from databases such as PubMed, MEDLINE, Scielo, and Google Scholar. Conclusions: The manual method is inexpensive and useful in academic training, but slower and more operator-dependent. The digital method is faster, more reproducible, and facilitates data storage and communication, although it requires an initial investment and training. Both methods are comparable in diagnostic accuracy. The digital method stands out for its efficiency and long-term sustainability, while the manual method retains its pedagogical value and applicability in resource-limited settings.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews
Published
2025-09-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2025.27.3.3138
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Dental Radiography and Imaging
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.79
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of manual vs. Digital cephalometric tracing

Diego J. Ramón, Valeria del Rosío Siguencia, Karla Teresita Segovia, Josselyn Fernanda Riofrio
1 citations
World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews
Dental Radiography and Imaging
1.79
article

Comparison of manual vs. Digital cephalometric tracing

Diego J. Ramón, Valeria del Rosío Siguencia, Karla Teresita Segovia, Josselyn Fernanda Riofrio
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Cephalometry is an essential tool in orthodontics for assessing skeletal, dental, and soft tissue relationships. Traditionally, it was performed manually, but with technological advancements, digital tracing software has become available, promising greater speed and reproducibility. Objective: To compare manual and digital cephalometric tracing in terms of accuracy, reproducibility, time, cost, and clinical impact. Materials and methods: This study is a narrative review of literature in English and Spanish based on information collected from databases such as PubMed, MEDLINE, Scielo, and Google Scholar. Conclusions: The manual method is inexpensive and useful in academic training, but slower and more operator-dependent. The digital method is faster, more reproducible, and facilitates data storage and communication, although it requires an initial investment and training. Both methods are comparable in diagnostic accuracy. The digital method stands out for its efficiency and long-term sustainability, while the manual method retains its pedagogical value and applicability in resource-limited settings.

World Journal of Advanced Research and ReviewsVol. 27(2)
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Dental Radiography and Imaging
1.79
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.