Steiner cephalometric analysis: predicted and actual treatment outcome compared RTH Abdullah MAR Kuijpers SJ Berge ´ C Katsaros Authors' affiliations: Rima T.H. Abdullah, Centre for Oral Growth and Development, Queen Mary’s School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary, University of London, London, UK Mette A.R. Kuijpers, Department of Orthodontics and Oral Biology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands and Department of Orthodontics, Dental School University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland Stefaan J. Berge ´, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands Christos Katsaros, Department of Orthodontics and Oral Biology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands Correspondence to: Christos Katsaros Department of Orthodontics and Oral Biology Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre 309 Tandheelkunde PO Box 9101 6500 HB Nijmegen The Netherlands Tel.: +31 24 361 4005 Fax: +31 24 354 0631 E-mail: c.katsaros@dent.umcn.nl Structured Abstract Authors – Abdullah RTH, Kuijpers MAR, Berge ´ SJ, Katsaros C Objective – To examine the accuracy and precision of the Steiner prediction cephalometric analysis. Setting and Subjects – The sample consisted of 275 randomly selected patients, treated between 1970 and 1995 at a university department. Methods – Lateral cephalograms before (T1) and after orthodontic treatment (T2) were analyzed using the Steiner analysis. A prediction of the final outcome at T2 for the variables ANB°, U1 to NA mm, L1 to NB mm, and Pg to NB mm was performed at T1. The difference between the actual outcome at T2 and the Steiner predicted value (SPV), which was done at T1, was calculated. Accuracy (mean difference between T2 and SPV) and precision (standard deviation of the mean prediction discrepancies) of the prediction were studied. Paired t-test was used to detect under- or overestimation of the predicted values. Results – The mean decrease in angle ANB was 1.4 ± 2.7° and for U1 to NA 2.0 ± 2.6 mm, while L1 to NB increased 0.8 ± 2.0 mm and Pg to NB 0.7 ± 1.1 mm. The predicted values for the changes in ANB angle, the distance of upper incisor U1 to NA as well as the distance Pg to NB were significantly overestimated when compared with the actual outcome, while the change in the distance of lower incisor L1 to NB was underestimated. Conclusion – The prediction of cephalometric treatment outcome as used in the Steiner analysis is not accurate enough to base orthodontic treatment decisions upon. Key words: cephalometry; orthodontics; prognosis; treatment outcome; validation study Dates: Accepted 9 March 2006 To cite this article: Orthod Craniofac Res 9, 2006; 77–83 Abdullah RTH, Kuijpers MAR, Berge ´ SJ, Katsaros C: Steiner cephalometric analysis: predicted and actual treatment outcome compared Copyright Ó Blackwell Munksgaard 2006