The applicability of the Tanaka and Johnston analysis in a contemporary Western Australian population

Dental Variables	Gender	N	Mean	SD	SEM	Mean Diff	t	P-value
Mandibular Incisors (mm)	M	177	23.57	1.33	0.10	0.344	2.95	0.003*
	F	323	23.23	1.20	0.07
Max-CPM (mm)	M	177	22.17	1.30	0.10	0.334	2.76	0.006
	F	323	21.84	1.28	0.07
Mand-CPM (mm)	M	177	21.84	1.27	0.10	0.504	4.36	<0.001*
	F	323	21.33	1.22	0.07

1 Note:

2* Statistically significant. M—male, F—female, N—number of the study population, SD—standard deviation, S.E.M—standard error of estimate, t–t value.

Table II.

Comparison of actual and predicted mesiodistal dimensions of canine and premolars using Tanaka and Johnston equation using paired t test.

			Actual value			Predicted value
Gender	Group variables	N	Mean	SD	SEM	Mean	SD	S.E.M	P-value
M	Max-CPM	177	22.17	1.30	0.10	22.79	0.66	0.05	<0.001*
	Max-CPM	177	21.84	1.27	0.10	22.29	0.66	0.05	<0.001*
F	Max-CPM	177	21.84	1.28	0.07	22.62	0.60	0.03	<0.001*
	Max-CPM	177	21.33	1.22	0.07	22.12	0.60	0.03	<0.001*

1 Note:

2* Statistically significant. Man-CPM—mandibular canines & premolars, Max-CPM—maxillary canine & premolars, M—male, F—female, N—number of the study population, SD—standard deviation, S.E.M—standard error of estimate.

Table III.

Regression parameters for the estimation of mesiodistal dimensions of canine and premolar in each arch for the Australian adolescent population.

Variable (Y)	X	Gender	a	P-value	b	P-value	Adj.R ²	SEE	r
Max-CPM	Mandibular Incisors	M	5.09	<0.001	0.725	<0.001	0.543	0.88	0.739
Man-CPM	Mandibular Incisors	M	6.34	<0.001	0.658	<0.001	0.471	0.92	0.688
Max-CPM	Mandibular Incisors	F	7.44	<0.001	0.620	<0.001	0.337	1.04	0.582
Man-CPM	Mandibular Incisors	F	5.59	<0.001	0.635	<0.001	0.386	0.96	0.623

1 Note: Man-CPM—mandibular canines & premolars, Max-CPM—maxillary canine & premolars, M—male, F—female, a, b—regression constant, R ²—coefficient of determination, SEE—standard error of estimate.

Table IV.

New regression equations for the estimation of mesiodistal dimensions of canine and premolar derived for both males and females of the Australian population.

Arch (Y)	Gender	Equation	r	P-value
Max-CPM	M	5.09 + 0.725 (X)	0.739	<0.001
	F	7.44 + 0.620 (X)	0.582	<0.001
Man-CPM	M	6.34 + 0.658 (X)	0.688	<0.001
	F	5.59 + 0.635 (X)	0.623	<0.001

1 Note: M—male, F—female, Y—canine premolar width to be estimated; X—combined mesiodistal width of mandibular incisors, r—regression coefficient.

Table V.

A prediction model for the estimation of mesiodistal dimensions of canines and premolars for Australian population adolescents.

	Male		Female
Mandibular Incisors	Max-CPM (Y₁)	Man-CPM (Y₂)	Max-CPM (Y₁)	Man-CPM (Y₂)
19.0	18.87	18.84	19.22	17.66
19.5	19.23	19.17	19.53	17.97
20.0	19.59	19.50	19.84	18.29
20.5	19.95	19.83	20.15	18.61
21.0	20.32	20.16	20.46	18.93
21.5	20.68	20.49	20.77	19.24
22.0	21.04	20.82	21.08	19.56
22.5	21.40	21.15	21.39	19.88
23.0	21.77	21.47	21.70	20.20
23.5	22.13	21.80	22.01	20.51
24.0	22.49	22.13	22.32	20.83
24.5	22.85	22.46	22.63	21.15
25.0	23.22	22.79	22.94	21.47
25.5	23.58	23.12	23.25	21.78
26.0	23.94	23.45	23.56	22.10
26.5	24.30	23.78	23.87	22.42
27.0	24.67	24.11	24.18	22.74
27.5	25.03	24.44	24.49	23.05
28.0	25.39	24.76	24.80	23.37
28.5	25.75	25.09	25.11	23.69
29.0	26.12	25.42	25.42	24.01

1 Note: Man-CPM—mandibular canines & premolars, Max-CPM—maxillary canine & premolars.

Table VI.

Comparison of regression parameters between the present study and other studies.

				Constants
Author & Year	Population	Gender	Canine-premolar segment	r	a	B	SEE	R ²
Tanaka and Johnston⁶	White American	M + F	Y₁	0.63	10.41	0.51	0.86	0.40
			Y₂	0.65	9.18	0.54	0.85	0.42
Frankel and Benz²¹	African American	M	Y₁	0.72	9.15	0.58	0.923	–
			Y₂	0.79	5.97	0.72	0.911	–
		F	Y₁	0.61	12.83	0.39	0.672	–
			Y₂	0.66	10.34	0.49	0.709	–
Yuen et al.⁴¹	Hongkong Chinese	M	Y₁	0.79	7.97	0.66	0.68	0.62
			Y₂	0.77	8.82	0.58	0.61	0.60
		F	Y₁	0.65	8.30	0.61	0.81	0.42
			Y₂	0.69	6.66	0.64	0.82	0.47
Jaroontham and Godfrey¹⁹	Thai	M	Y₁	0.54	13.36	0.41	0.88	0.29
			Y₂	0.58	11.92	0.43	0.85	0.34
		F	Y₁	0.62	11.16	0.49	0.78	0.39
			Y₂	0.65	9.49	0.53	0.78	0.42
Al-Bitar et al.¹⁶	Jordan	M	Y₁	0.57	11.80	0.43	0.88	0.33
			Y₂	0.65	9.32	0.53	0.87	0.42
		F	Y₁	0.61	11.25	0.44	0.75	0.38
			Y₂	0.68	9.22	0.50	0.72	0.47
Arslan et al.³	Turkey	M	Y₁	0.79	9.98	0.50	0.72	0.62
			Y₂	0.74	9.54	0.50	0.78	0.54
		F	Y₁	0.83	9.77	0.50	0.72	0.68
			Y₂	0.69	9.14	0.50	0.81	0.47
Pardede et al.³⁵	Indonesia	M	Y₁	0.67	10.51	0.54	0.87	0.45
			Y₂	0.71	8.03	0.60	0.88	0.50
		F	Y₁	0.57	11.63	0.47	0.93	0.32
			Y₂	0.61	11.16	0.45	0.81	0.36
Present study	Western Australian	M	Y₁	0.74	5.09	0.72	0.88	0.54
			Y₂	0.69	6.34	0.66	0.92	0.47
		F	Y₁	0.58	7.44	0.62	1.04	0.34
			Y₂	0.62	5.59	0.63	0.96	0.39

References

Authors

Metrics

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/aoj-2022-0018 | Journal eISSN: 2207-7480 | Journal ISSN: 2207-7472

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 153 - 161

Submitted on: Feb 1, 2022

Accepted on: Apr 1, 2022

Published on: Jul 6, 2022

Published by: Australian Society of Orthodontists Inc.

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

Related subjects:

Medicine,

Basic medical science,

Basic medical science, other

© 2022 Sidra Abaid, Sobia Zafar, Estie Kruger, Marc Tennant, published by Australian Society of Orthodontists Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Volume 38 (2022): Issue 1 (January 2022)

The applicability of the Tanaka and Johnston analysis in a contemporary Western Australian population

Figures & Tables

Figure 1.

Table I.

Table II.

Table III.

Table IV.

Table V.

Table VI.

Paradigm

My account