Análisis comparativo de métodos del riesgo de impactación de caninos maxilares en ortopantomografías de niños y adolescentes en Huancavelica 2023.
Loading...
Date
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universidad Privada de Huancayo Franklin Roosevelt
DOI
Abstract
La investigación tiene por objetivo determinar el análisis comparativo de métodos del riesgo de impactación de caninos maxilares en ortopantomografías de niños y adolescentes en Huancavelica 2023. La metodología fue de tipo descriptivo – comparativo, la muestra estuvo representada de 114 radiografías panorámicas con 228 caninos maxilares permanentes. Teniendo como resultado de acuerdo con el pronóstico del riesgo de impactación de caninos maxilares para el método de Power & Short el pronóstico desfavorable fue 8,77% (N=20) y para el método de Warford fue 10,08& (N=23). En conclusión, no existen diferencias estadísticas significativas entre los métodos de Power & Short y Warford y a mayor edad el pronóstico se vuelve menos favorable.
The objective of the research was to determine the comparative analysis of methods of the risk of impaction of maxillary canines in orthopantomographies of children and adolescents in Huancavelica 2023. The methodology was descriptive-comparative, the sample was represented by 114 panoramic radiographs with 228 permanent maxillary canines. As a result, according to the prognosis of the risk of maxillary canine impaction, the unfavorable prognosis for the Power & Short method was 8.77% (N=20) and for the Warford method it was 10.08& (N=23). In conclusion, there are no significant statistical differences between the Power & Short and Warford methods and the older the age, the less favorable the prognosis.
The objective of the research was to determine the comparative analysis of methods of the risk of impaction of maxillary canines in orthopantomographies of children and adolescents in Huancavelica 2023. The methodology was descriptive-comparative, the sample was represented by 114 panoramic radiographs with 228 permanent maxillary canines. As a result, according to the prognosis of the risk of maxillary canine impaction, the unfavorable prognosis for the Power & Short method was 8.77% (N=20) and for the Warford method it was 10.08& (N=23). In conclusion, there are no significant statistical differences between the Power & Short and Warford methods and the older the age, the less favorable the prognosis.
Description
Keywords
Citation
Vancouver
Collections
Endorsement
Review
Supplemented By
Referenced By
Creative Commons license
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
