Suppr超能文献

正畸治疗需求的3种咬合指数的可靠性和有效性比较。

A comparison of the reliability and validity of 3 occlusal indexes of orthodontic treatment need.

作者信息

Beglin F M, Firestone A R, Vig K W, Beck F M, Kuthy R A, Wade D

机构信息

College of Dentistry, Columbus, OH 43218-2357, USA.

出版信息

Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001 Sep;120(3):240-6. doi: 10.1067/mod.2001.116401.

Abstract

Several occlusal indexes are currently used to ascertain eligibility for orthodontic treatment. A comparison of 3 indexes of orthodontic treatment need was made with the consensus opinion of a panel of 15 experienced orthodontists. Sets of study casts (170) representing the full spectrum of malocclusions were selected. An examiner, calibrated in the Dental Aesthetic Index, the Handicapping Labiolingual Deviation with the California Modification, and the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need, scored the casts. The panel of orthodontists individually rated the same casts for their degree of orthodontic treatment need. The mean rating of the panel on the need for treatment was used as the gold standard for evaluating the validity of the indexes. Intrarater and interrater reliability was high (kappa > 0.8). Overall accuracy of the indexes, as reflected in area under receiver-operating characteristic curves, was also high: Dental Aesthetic Index, 95%; Handicapping Labiolingual Deviation with the California Modification, 94%; and Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need, 98%. Cutoff points for the indexes that resulted in the closest agreement with the gold standard differed from the published cutoff points for the indexes. The indexes appear to be valid measures of treatment need as perceived by orthodontists. The published cutoff points for the indexes were more conservative in assigning patients for treatment than a panel of orthodontists. However, adjusting the cutoff points moved all 3 indexes into close agreement with the experts.

摘要

目前有几种咬合指数用于确定正畸治疗的适应证。将3种正畸治疗需求指数与由15位经验丰富的正畸医生组成的专家小组的一致意见进行了比较。选取了代表各种错牙合畸形的研究模型(170套)。一名经牙科美学指数、加利福尼亚改良版唇舌向缺陷指数和正畸治疗需求指数校准的检查者对模型进行了评分。正畸医生小组分别对相同的模型进行正畸治疗需求程度的评分。将专家小组对治疗需求的平均评分用作评估指数有效性的金标准。检查者内和检查者间的可靠性较高(kappa>0.8)。通过受试者工作特征曲线下面积反映的指数总体准确性也较高:牙科美学指数为95%;加利福尼亚改良版唇舌向缺陷指数为94%;正畸治疗需求指数为98%。与金标准达成最接近一致的指数截断点与已公布的指数截断点不同。这些指数似乎是正畸医生所认为的治疗需求的有效衡量指标。已公布的指数截断点在分配患者进行治疗方面比正畸医生小组更为保守。然而,调整截断点使所有3种指数与专家意见达成了密切一致。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验