Department of Oral Rehabilitation, School of Dentistry, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2012 Apr;23(4):453-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0501.2011.02162.x. Epub 2011 Mar 28.
To test the reliability and validity of six aesthetic parameters and to compare the professional- and patient-reported aesthetic outcomes.
Thirty-four patients with 66 implant-supported premolar crowns were included. Two prosthodontists and 11 dental students evaluated six aesthetic parameters, the Copenhagen Index Score (CIS): (i) crown morphology score, (ii) crown colour match score, (iii) symmetry/harmony score, (iv) mucosal discolouration score, (v) papilla index score, mesially and (vi) papilla index score, distally. The intra- and inter-observer agreement and the internal consistency were analysed by Cohen's κ and Cronbach's α, respectively. The validity of CIS parameters was tested against the corresponding Visual Analogue Scales (VAS) scores. The Spearman correlation coefficients were used. Six aesthetic Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) questions were correlated to the CIS and the overall VAS scores.
The intra-observer agreement was >70% in 2/3 and >50% in all observations. The inter-observed agreement was >50% in 4/5 of all observations. The mucosal discolouration score had the overall highest observed agreement followed by the papilla index scores. The crown morphology and the symmetry/harmony scores had the overall lowest agreement. The Cronbach α value was over 0.8 for all observers. All CIS scores demonstrated significant (P<0.0001) correlation to the corresponding VAS scores. Low correlation coefficients (CIS/OHIP: r(s) <0.36; VAS/OHIP: r(s) >-0,24) were found between patient and professional evaluations.
The feasibility, reliability and validity of the CIS make the parameters useful for quality control of implant-supported restorations. The professional- and patient-reported aesthetic outcomes had no significant correlation.
测试六个美学参数的可靠性和有效性，并比较专业和患者报告的美学结果。
共纳入 34 名接受 66 颗种植体支持的前磨牙冠修复的患者。两名修复科医生和 11 名牙科技师评估了六个美学参数，哥本哈根指数评分（CIS）：（i）牙冠形态评分，（ii）牙冠颜色匹配评分，（iii）对称性/和谐性评分，（iv）黏膜变色评分，（v）近中龈乳头指数评分，（vi）远中龈乳头指数评分。通过 Cohen's κ 分析和 Cronbach's α 分别分析了观察者内和观察者间的一致性以及内部一致性。CIS 参数的有效性通过与相应的视觉模拟量表（VAS）评分进行测试。使用 Spearman 相关系数。将六个美学口腔健康影响概况（OHIP）问题与 CIS 和总体 VAS 评分相关联。
在 2/3 的观察中，观察者内一致性>70%，在所有观察中>50%。在 4/5 的观察中，观察者间一致性>50%。黏膜变色评分的总体观察一致性最高，其次是龈乳头指数评分。牙冠形态和对称性/和谐性评分的总体一致性最低。所有观察者的 Cronbach α 值均>0.8。所有 CIS 评分与相应的 VAS 评分均呈显著相关性（P<0.0001）。患者和专业人员评估之间发现低相关系数（CIS/OHIP：r(s)<0.36；VAS/OHIP：r(s)>0.24）。
CIS 的可行性、可靠性和有效性使其成为控制种植体支持修复体质量的有用参数。专业和患者报告的美学结果之间没有显著相关性。
