Thomson W M
Dental Public Health, School of Dentistry, The University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
Angle Orthod. 2002 Oct;72(5):449-55. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(2002)072<0449:OTOITL>2.0.CO;2.
The aim of this study was to use a health services research (HSR) approach to examine the longer-term outcomes of orthodontic treatment. Participants in a longstanding population-based New Zealand cohort study (the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study) were allocated to one of four malocclusion severity categories on the basis of orthodontic data collected at age 12. The outcome of that care by age 26 was evaluated using the key indicators of equity (was it fair?); efficacy (did it work?); effectiveness (did it work in the longer term?); and safety (was it associated with a greater subsequent experience of caries, periodontal disease, or tooth loss?). Data were available for 452 Study members, of whom 56.2% were in the minor/none category, 29.0% were in the definite category, 10.2% were in the severe category, and 4.6% were in the handicapping treatment-need category. No clear differences in treatment uptake by socioeconomic status were apparent, and the proportion treated increased across the malocclusion severity categories, as did the proportion that showed an improvement following treatment. By age 26 a difference between those who had and those who had not been treated was evident, with the percentage of those rating their dental appearance as above average increasing with increasing severity of the age-12 orthodontic treatment need. This was also true for the percentage that considered their orthodontic treatment to have been successful. There were no significant differences in caries experience, periodontal disease occurrence, or tooth loss between those who had and had not been treated by age 26. This study has found the equity, efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of orthodontic treatment in the Dunedin cohort to be acceptable.
本研究旨在采用卫生服务研究(HSR)方法,探究正畸治疗的长期效果。在一项长期开展的新西兰人群队列研究(达尼丁多学科健康与发展研究)中,根据12岁时收集的正畸数据,将参与者分为四个错颌严重程度类别之一。通过公平性(是否公平?)、疗效(是否有效?)、有效性(长期来看是否有效?)和安全性(是否与随后更高的龋齿、牙周病或牙齿脱落发生率相关?)等关键指标,评估了26岁时该治疗的结果。共有452名研究成员的数据可供分析,其中56.2%属于轻度/无错颌类别,29.0%属于明确类别,10.2%属于严重类别,4.6%属于有矫治需求的残疾类别。社会经济地位对治疗接受情况没有明显差异,随着错颌严重程度类别的增加,接受治疗的比例和治疗后显示改善的比例也都有所增加。到26岁时,接受治疗和未接受治疗的人之间存在明显差异,随着12岁时正畸治疗需求严重程度的增加,对自己牙齿外观评价为高于平均水平的人的比例也在增加。认为自己正畸治疗成功的人的比例也是如此。到26岁时,接受治疗和未接受治疗的人在龋齿发生率、牙周病发生率或牙齿脱落方面没有显著差异。本研究发现,达尼丁队列中正畸治疗的公平性、疗效、有效性和安全性是可以接受的。