• Users Online: 46
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 3  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 86-89

An assessment of relationship between dermatoglyphics and tooth loss


1 Intern, Department of Public Health Dentistry, Pushpagiri College of Dental Sciences, Tiruvalla, Kerala, India
2 Department of Periodontology, Pushpagiri College of Dental Sciences, Tiruvalla, Kerala, India

Date of Web Publication13-Nov-2018

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Benley George
Intern, Department of Periodontology, Pushpagiri College of Dental Sciences, Tiruvalla, Kerala
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijfo.ijfo_19_18

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 


Background: Dermatoglyphics are the patterns of the skin ridges on pads of fingers which constitute a person's fingerprints. Several studies have shown that there exists a relationship between dermatoglyphics and dental diseases and conditions such as dental caries, periodontal disease, and malocclusion. The study aimed to determine the relationship between dermatoglyphics and tooth loss.
Materials and Methods: The study comprised 100 patients, including fifty dentulous and fifty edentulous participants. The fingerprint patterns of the participants were recorded by a single investigator with a rolling impression technique using duplicating ink on an executive bond paper. Dermatoglyphic patterns of all ten palmar digits were recorded using Cummins and Midlo method. The level of significance was set as P < 0.05.
Results: The study showed that in dentulous patients, there was a highest prevalence of whorl pattern (50.8%), followed by ulnar loop (45.2%), radial loop (3.2%), and arch (0.8%) patterns. The prevalence of pattern was similar for edentulous patients; however, the prevalence of whorls reduced to 49.8%, ulnar loops to 37.4%, and radial loops to 2.8% whereas the prevalence of arch patterns increased to 10%.
Conclusion: The whorl pattern was the most prevalent pattern among both dentulous and edentulous patients followed by ulnar loop pattern. The present study showed that ulnar loop pattern was most prevalent in the fifth digit of both right and left hands of edentulous patients whereas the ulnar loop was prevalent in the third digit of both right and left hands of dentulous patients.

Keywords: Dermatoglyphics, fingerprint pattern, tooth loss


How to cite this article:
Archana P J, George B, Sebastian ST, Soman RR, Mulamoottil VM. An assessment of relationship between dermatoglyphics and tooth loss. Int J Forensic Odontol 2018;3:86-9

How to cite this URL:
Archana P J, George B, Sebastian ST, Soman RR, Mulamoottil VM. An assessment of relationship between dermatoglyphics and tooth loss. Int J Forensic Odontol [serial online] 2018 [cited 2018 Dec 10];3:86-9. Available from: http://www.ijofo.org/text.asp?2018/3/2/86/245307




  Introduction Top


Human skin, the largest organ of the human body, performs various vital functions in life. The palms of hand and soles of the feet are covered with two totally distinct classes of marks. The most conspicuous are the creases or folds of the skin which interest the followers of palmistry.[1] Dermatoglyphics are the patterns of the skin ridges on pads of fingers which constitute a person's fingerprints.[2] The term was coined in 1926 by Cummins and Midlo, although Cummins is considered to be the father of dermatoglyphics.[3] Toward the end of the 19th century, Galton put forth a rule called “proof of no change,” which states that an individual's dermatoglyphics remain unchanged throughout his or her lifetime.[4] Due to their unique nature, studying them can determine a number of parameters, which could be helpful in diagnosing and treatment of examined individuals.[5] Thus, it is considered to be an important tool in assessing the genetic trait, evaluation of children with suspected genetic disorders, and also forensics.[6],[7] The ridged skin is considered to be a sensitive indicator of intrauterine dental anomalies as it originates from fetal volar pads similar to the teeth which also originates from the same ectodermal layer in the 6th–7th week of embryonic life.[8] Hence, when an intrauterine dermal change occurs, a tooth anomaly can be expected.[9] The basic patterns are whorls, arches, and loops; however, the size, spacing, and shape give them their distinct personality.[10]

In the recent past, a number of investigators have focused their attention in finding out an association of morphological and genetic characteristics with a number of pathological conditions. In a study conducted by Sharma and Somani, patients with dental caries had a positive correlation with the loops (decreased frequency of loops) and growth of Streptococcus mutans.[11] In a study conducted by Saxena et al., 48 cleft participants and 50 healthy controls with both their parents were evaluated and they found increased frequency of loops and arches and low mean total ridge count in cleft participants. They also found increased frequency of loops and arches with decreased frequency of whorls and mean total ridge count.[12]

Although edentulism has been described to be on the decline in many developed countries, tooth loss continues to be a major public health problem globally, and causes of tooth extractions had large geographical and cultural differences among various regions in a country and from one country to another.[13] The research regarding dermatoglyphics and tooth loss is still in its early stages. Hence, if such a relationship is established between dermatoglyphics and tooth loss, early detection can aid the clinician to anticipate health problems in adults and initiate preventive and protective measures at the earliest. Until now, there exists no literature pertaining to the relationship between dermatoglyphics and tooth loss. Hence, the current study was conducted to assess the relationship between dermatoglyphics and tooth loss.


  Materials and Methods Top


The present study was conducted during the period of January–March 2018. The study comprised 100 patients who visited Pushpagiri College of Dental Sciences, Thiruvalla. Of the total participants, 50 dentulous and 50 edentulous participants were included. The participants were in the age group of 30–50 years. The exclusion criteria were as follows:

  1. The absence of any digits
  2. Patients with conditions which did not permit accurate recording of fingerprints
  3. Pregnant females
  4. Patients with orthodontic appliances and fixed partial denture
  5. Third molars were excluded.


Before the start of the study, approval was obtained from the institutional ethics committee. Written informed consent was obtained from all the participants. Before the start of the procedure, the hands of the participants were cleaned using antiseptic lotion and water to remove sweat, oil, or dirt from the palmar surface and allowed to dry. The fingerprint patterns of the participants were recorded by a single investigator with a rolling impression technique using duplicating ink on an executive bond paper. The investigator was trained in recording the fingerprints before the start of the study at the department of public health dentistry under the guidance of an expert. Dermatoglyphic patterns of all ten palmar digits were recorded using Cummins and Midlo method.[14] All ten fingers of a single participant were studied under adequate light and magnification using a ×10 magnifying glass and classified into three basic types according to shape, whorls, loops, and arches. Loop pattern was subdivided into ulnar loop and radial loops. Ulnar loop pattern composed of ridges which open to the ulnar side and radial loop pattern composed of ridges which open to the radial side [Figure 1].
Figure 1: Fingerprint patterns

Click here to view


The data were entered into Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Statistical analysis was done by SPSS software, 18 version (IBM, Chicago, Illinois, USA). The intergroup data were analyzed using the Chi-square test and the level of significance was set as P < 0.05 with a confidence level of 95%.


  Results Top


A total of 50 dentulous and 50 edentulous patients participated in the study. The frequency distribution of all pattern types on fingertips of dentulous and edentulous patients was assessed [Table 1]. It was found that in dentulous patients, there was a highest prevalence of whorl pattern (50.8%), followed by ulnar loop (45.2%), radial loop (3.2%), and arch (0.8%) patterns. The prevalence of pattern was similar for edentulous patients; however, the prevalence of whorls reduced to 49.8%, ulnar loops to 37.4%, and radial loops to 2.8% whereas the prevalence of arch pattern increased to 10%.
Table 1: Frequency distribution of fingerprint patterns among study participants

Click here to view


The frequency distribution of all pattern types on individual fingertips of dentulous and edentulous patients was assessed [Table 2]. The ulnar loop pattern was highest in the fifth digit of both right and left hands of edentulous patients, whereas in dentulous patients, the ulnar loop pattern was highest in the third digit of both right and left hands. The difference was found to be statistically not significant. The whorl pattern was highest among both edentulous and dentulous patients in the first digit of both right and left hands. The difference observed was not statistically significant. It was noted that the highest prevalence of arch pattern was found on the third digit of the right hand among dentulous patients which was similar to that of dentulous patients.
Table 2: Comparison of finger patterns against dentulous and edentulous participants

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


Dermatoglyphics refers to the frictional ridge formation which appears on the palms of hand and soles of feet. The development of primary palate and lip is completed by the 7th week of intrauterine life and that of secondary palate by 12th week. The dermal ridges develop in relation to volar pads, which are formed by the 6th week of gestation, reach maximum size between 12th and 13th weeks, and are completely formed after 10–20 weeks of gestation.[11],[15],[16]

In dentistry, dermatoglyphics has been studied in cleft lip and palate, hereditary gingival fibromatosis, periodontal diseases, dental caries, dental malocclusions and potentially malignant disorders (oral submucous fibrosis, leukoplakia, and oral cancer), malignant disorders. and aphthous ulcer of the oral cavity.[11],[15],[17],[18],[19] Genetic or chromosomal abnormalities might be reflected as alterations in dermal ridges; they can be readily used as an accessible tool in the study of genetically influenced diseases.[20]

If dermatoglyphic patterns determine the genetic predisposition of individual tooth loss, what is the prediction value (ie, the odds ratio). The type of fingerprints is unique and unalterable and is based on the genetic constitution of each individual. These dermal patterns once formed remain constant throughout life and also the impression recording or fingerprint can be accomplished rapidly, inexpensively, and without causing any trauma to the patient.[21] The modern study of the hand is far removed from the popular image of the traditional palmist uttering mysterious incantations in an arcane language. Rather, through decades of scientific research, the hand has come to be recognized as a powerful tool in the diagnosis of psychological, medical, and genetic conditions.[22],[23]

In the present study, it was found that the most common fingerprint among dentulous and edentulous patients was whorl pattern. The least common fingerprint was arch pattern among dentulous patients and radial loop pattern among edentulous patients. The study showed that arch pattern was ten times more prevalent in edentulous patients when compared to dentulous patients in the third digit of both hands. The dearth of published literature on dermatoglyphics and tooth loss is a limitation for the present study. To date, this is the first study conducted to determine the relationship between dermatoglyphics and tooth loss across the globe.


  Conclusion Top


Finger patterns are genotypically determined and remain unchanged from birth till death. Dermatoglyphics has shown to be a cheap and noninvasive tool for early detection of various dental diseases. The present study showed that the whorl pattern was the most prevalent pattern among both dentulous and edentulous patients followed by ulnar loop pattern. The difference observed was not statistically significant which could be attributed to the small sample size. The study showed that the ulnar loop pattern was most prevalent in the fifth digit of both right and left hands of edentulous patients whereas the ulnar loop was prevalent in the third digit of both right and left hands of dentulous patients. The difference observed was not statistically significant. Future studies on diverse and larger population would perhaps provide a conclusive relationship between dermatoglyphics and tooth loss.

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank Mrs. Nisha Kurien, Statistician, Pushpagiri Institute of Medical Sciences, Tiruvalla, Kerala, for the help in completing the statistical analysis of the study.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Madan N, Rathnam A, Bajaj N. Palmistry: A tool for dental caries prediction! Indian J Dent Res 2011;22:213-8.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Sharma A, Kapoor PD. Dermatoglyphics, dentistry and diagnosis – A review. Baba Farid Univ Dent J 2010;1:45-8.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Venkatesh E, Bagewadi A, Vaishali K, Aravind S. Palmar dermatoglyphics in oral leukoplakia and oral squamous cell carcinoma patients. J Indian Acad Oral Med Radiol 2008;20:94-9.  Back to cited text no. 3
  [Full text]  
4.
Kimura S. Embryologic development of flexion creases. Birth Defects Orig Artic Ser 1991;27:113-29.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Stosljević M, Adamović M. Dermatoglyphic characteristics of digito-palmar complex in autistic boys in Serbia. Vojnosanit Pregl 2013;70:386-90.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Kamboj M. Dermatoglyphics. Br Dent J 2008;204:51.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Namouchi I. Anthropological significance of dermatoglyphic trait variation: An intra-Tunisian population analysis. Int J Mod Anthropol 2011;4:12-27.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Atasu M, Akyuz S. Congenital hypodontia: A pedigree and dermatoglyphic study. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1995;19:215-24.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Bhat PK, Badiyani BK, Aruna CN, Chengappa S, Bhasker NN. Dermatoglyphics: A new diagnostic tool in detection of dental caries among deaf and mute children. Int J Clin Dent Sci 2011;2:80-4.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Ceena DE, Ahmed J, Shenoy N, Binnal A. Dermatoglyphics in dentistry – A review. Int J Curr Res Rev 2013;5:30-3.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Sharma A, Somani R. Dermatoglyphic interpretation of dental caries and its correlation to salivary bacteria interactions: An in vivo study. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2009;27:17-21.  Back to cited text no. 11
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
12.
Saxena RS, David MP, Indira AP. Dermatoglyphic evaluation in subjects and parents of cleft lip with and without cleft palate. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2013;50:e105-10.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Al-Shammari KF, Al-Ansari JM, Al-Melh MA, Al-Khabbaz AK. Reasons for tooth extraction in Kuwait. Med Princ Pract 2006;15:417-22.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Cummins H. Revised methods of interpretation and formulation of palmar dermatoglyphics. Am J Phys Anthropol 1929;12:415-502.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Mathew L, Hegde AM, Rai K. Dermatoglyphic peculiarities in children with oral clefts. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2005;23:179-82.  Back to cited text no. 15
[PUBMED]  [Full text]  
16.
Ahmed RH, Aref MI, Hassan RM, Mohammed NR. Dermatoglyphic study on patients with dental caries who wearing dental fillings and its correlation to apoptosis that induced by using dental fillings. Natl Sci 2010;8:54-7.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
predictive Reddy S, Prabhakar AR, Reddy VV. A dermatoglyphic and comparative study of class I, class II, div 1, div. 2 and class III malocclusions. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 1997;15:13-9.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Skrinjarić I, Bacić M. Hereditary gingival fibromatosis: Report on three families and dermatoglyphic analysis. J Periodontal Res 1989;24:303-9.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Atasu M. Dermatoglyphic findings in periodontal diseases. Int J Anthropol 2005;20:63-75.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Tikare S, Rajesh G, Prasad KW, Thippeswamy V, Javali SB. Dermatoglyphics – A marker for malocclusion? Int Dent J 2010;60:300-4.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Latti BR, Kalburge JV. Palmistry in dentistry. J Adv Med Dent Sci 2013;1:25-33.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Shuler CF. Inherited risks for susceptibility to dental caries. J Dent Educ 2001;65:1038-45.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Schaumann B, Alter M. Dermatoglyphics in Medical Disorders. New York: Springer Verlag Publishers; 1976. p. 27-87.  Back to cited text no. 23
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Me...
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed83    
    Printed4    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded20    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]