Johansson Anneli M, Follin Marie E
Orthodontic Department, Institute of Odontology, the Sahlgrenska Academy at Göteborg University, Sweden.
Eur J Orthod. 2009 Apr;31(2):184-8. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjn094. Epub 2009 Jan 6.
The aim of the present study was to evaluate if orthodontists in Sweden agree with the grading in the Dental Health Component (DHC) of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need, to analyze if certain malocclusions are graded differently, and to determine if there are any background factors among Swedish orthodontists that could be related to their judgements. Two questionnaires were sent to 272 orthodontists in Sweden. In one questionnaire, they were asked to grade different malocclusions (defined in the DHC) according to the need for orthodontic treatment and in the other to provide details of their background. Eighty-one per cent (219) answered one or both questionnaires and 216 answered the questions concerning the need for orthodontic treatment. The Swedish orthodontists' judgements were then compared with the gradings in the DHC. Statistical analysis was undertaken using chi-square, likelihood ratio chi-square, phi coefficient, contingency coefficient, and Cramer's V tests. The result showed that almost all participating orthodontists agreed that grade 1 of the index indicated no need for treatment. For grade 2 (little need), the opinions differed, but still the majority were in agreement with the index. The judgements for malocclusions in grade 3 (borderline need) were widespread, but the majority considered 3a, 3c, and 3f to have a need or a great treatment need. The only statistical correlation with background factors was that female orthodontists graded 3f higher than borderline. For grades 4 and 5 (need and great need), the Swedish orthodontists thought that all the malocclusions required treatment except 4x, which the majority considered to be borderline. The participating Swedish orthodontists in this study graded fewer malocclusions in grade 3 and the majority were of the opinion that compared with the DHC, more malocclusions needed treatment.
本研究的目的是评估瑞典的正畸医生是否认同正畸治疗需求指数的口腔健康部分(DHC)中的分级,分析某些错颌畸形的分级是否存在差异,并确定瑞典正畸医生中是否存在可能与其判断相关的背景因素。向瑞典的272名正畸医生发送了两份问卷。在一份问卷中,要求他们根据正畸治疗需求对错颌畸形(在DHC中定义)进行分级,在另一份问卷中,要求他们提供个人背景细节。81%(219名)回复了一份或两份问卷,216名回复了有关正畸治疗需求的问题。然后将瑞典正畸医生的判断与DHC中的分级进行比较。使用卡方检验、似然比卡方检验、phi系数、列联系数和克莱默V检验进行统计分析。结果显示,几乎所有参与研究的正畸医生都认为该指数的1级表示无需治疗。对于2级(轻度需求),意见存在分歧,但大多数人仍与该指数一致。对于3级(临界需求)错颌畸形的判断较为分散,但大多数人认为3a、3c和3f有治疗需求或有很大治疗需求。与背景因素唯一的统计相关性是,女性正畸医生对3f的分级高于临界值。对于4级和5级(需求和强烈需求),瑞典正畸医生认为除了4x大多数人认为是临界值外,所有错颌畸形都需要治疗。参与本研究的瑞典正畸医生对3级错颌畸形的分级较少,并且大多数人认为与DHC相比,更多的错颌畸形需要治疗。