Reliability assessment and correlation analysis of evaluating orthodontic treatment outcome in Chinese patients

Abstract

A comprehensive survey of six orthodontic treatment centers in China indicates a high level of consistency with which Chinese orthodontic specialists assess treatment outcomes. The study, led by Tian-Min Xu of Peking University, is the first of its kind to compare the values of different combinations of methods for such assessments. The three most commonly used approaches to evaluate the success of orthodontic procedures are: study, or plaster, casts; cephalometric films, or head images (traditionally x-rays); and facial photographs. Previous studies examined the predictive potential of each of these methods in isolation. Xu and colleagues showed that study casts were the most reliable predictors of successful treatment. The additional use of cephalometric films and facial photographs increased the likelihood of a reliable assessment. More than 300, 000 Chinese patients undergo orthodontic procedures annually.

Keywords

correlation analysis / orthodontic treatment outcome / reliability / subjective assessment

References

[1] Lin JX, Xu TM. [History and development of Chinese orthodontics.]. Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao, 2008, 40(1): 11-14.

[2] Fu MK. [An insight into orthodontics in China.]. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi, 2004, 39(2): 89-90.

[3] Yeweng SJ, Huang SF, Ren LJ. Orthodontics in China. J Orthod, 2002, 29(1): 62-65.

[4] Pickering EA, Vig P. The occlusal index to assess orthodontic treatment. Br J Orthod, 1975, 2(1): 47-51.

[5] Elderton RJ, Clark JD. Orthodontic treatment in the general dental services assessed by the Occlusal Index. Br J Orthod, 1983, 10(4): 178-186.

[6] Richmond S, Shaw WC, O’Brien KD. The development of the PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): reliability and validity. Eur J Orthod, 1992, 14(2): 125-139.

[7] Richmond S, Shaw WC, Roberts CT. The PAR index (Peer Assessment Rating): methods to determine outcome of orthodontic treatment in terms of improvement and standards. Eur J Orthod, 1992, 14(3): 180-187.

[8] Casko JS, Vaden JL, Kokich VG. Objective grading system for dental casts and panoramic radiographs. American Board of Orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1998, 114(5): 589-599.

[9] Costalos PA, Sarraf K, Cangialosi TJ. Evaluation of the accuracy of digital model analysis for the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system for dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2005, 128(5): 624-629.

[10] Richmond S, Daniels CP. International comparisons of professional assessments in orthodontics: Part 1—Treatment need. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1998, 113(3): 180-185.

[11] Richmond S, Daniels CP. International comparisons of professional assessments in orthodontics: Part 2—Treatment outcome. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1998, 113(3): 324-328.

[12] Daniels C, Richmond S. The development of the index of complexity, outcome and need (ICON). J Orthod, 2000, 27(2): 149-162.

[13] Savastano NJ, Firestone AR, Beck FM. Validation of the complexity and treatment outcome components of the index of complexity, outcome, and need (ICON). Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2003, 124(3): 244-248.

[14] Pangrazio-Kulbersh V, Kaczynski R, Shunock M. Early treatment outcome assessed by the Peer Assessment Rating index. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1999, 115(5): 544-550.

[15] Liu SQ, Shen G, Bai D. [Consistency of the subjective evaluation of malocclusion severity by the Chinese orthodontic experts.]. Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao, 2012, 44(1): 98-102.

[16] Song GY, Li WR, Geng Z. [Agreement analysis of subjective evaluation of orthodontic treatment outcome.]. Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao, 2012, 44(1): 103-107.

[17] Phillips C, Tuloch C, Dann C. Rating of facial attractiveness. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 1992, 24(4): 214-220.

[18] Stephenson W. The study of behavior: Q-technique and its methodology, 1953 Chicago 376.

[19] Block J. The Q-sort method in personality assessment and psychiatric research, 1961 Philadelphia 5.

[20] Airton OA. Occlusal indexes as judged by subjective opinions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2008, 134(5): 671-675.

[21] Cox NH, Frans PG. Facial harmony. Am J Orthod, 1971, 60(2): 175-183.

[22] Liao ZY, Jian F, Long H. Validity assessment and determination of the cutoff value for the index of complexity, outcome and need among 12–13 year-olds in southern Chinese. Int J Oral Sci, 2012, 4(2): 88-93.

[23] Roberts CT, Richmond S. The design and analysis of reliability studies for the use of epidemiological and audit indices in orthodontics. Br J Orthod, 1997, 24(2): 139-147.

[24] Onyeaso CO, Begole EA. Relationship between index of complexity, outcome and need, dental aesthetic index, peer assessment rating index, and American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2007, 131(2): 248-252.

[25] Bartko JJ. The intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of reliability. Phychol Rep, 1966, 19(1): 3-11.

[26] Lieber WS, Carlson SK, Baumrind S. Clinical use of the ABO-scoring index: reliability and subtraction frequency. Angle Orthod, 2003, 73(5): 556-564.

[27] Pinskaya YB, Hsieh TJ, Roberts WE. Comprehensive clinical evaluation as an outcome assessment for a graduate orthodontic program. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2004, 126(5): 533-543.

[28] Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 1997, 33(1): 159-174.

[29] Bowden DE, Davies AP. Inter- and intraexaminer variability in assessment of orthodontic treatment need. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 1975, 3(4): 198-200.

[30] Xu TM, Korn EL, Yan L. Facial attractiveness: ranking of end-of-treatment facial photographs by pairs of Chinese and US orthodontists. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2008, 134(1): 74-84.

[31] Liu Y, Korn EL, Oh HS. Comparison of Chinese and US orthodontists’ averaged evaluations of “facial attractiveness” from end-of-treatment facial photographs. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2009, 135(5): 621-634.

[32] Evans R, Shaw W. Preliminary evaluation of an illustrated scale for rating dental attractiveness. Eur J Orthod, 1987, 9(4): 314-318.

[33] Woolass KF, Shaw WC. Validity and reproducibility of rating dental attractiveness from study casts. Br J Orthod, 1987, 14(3): 187-190.

[34] Brown R, Richmond S. An update on the analysis of agreement for orthodontic indices. Eur J Orthod, 2005, 27(3): 286-291.

[35] Kendall MG. A new measure of rank correlation. Biometrika, 1938, 30(2): 81-93.

[36] Summers CJ. The occlusal index: a system for identifying and scoring occlusal disorders. Am J Orthod, 1971, 59(6): 553-567.

[37] Andrews LF. The six keys to normal occlusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1972, 62(3): 296-309.

[38] Oh HS, Korn EL, Zhang XY. Correlations between cephlometric and photographic measurements of facial attractiveness in Chinese and US patients after orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2009, 136(6): 762.e1-762.e14.