School of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Eur J Orthod. 2013 Dec;35(6):772-82. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjt009. Epub 2013 Mar 15.
Several indices are now available to assess the severity of the malocclusion in cleft lip and/or palate (CLP) patients; and although it has been quite some time since the introduction of these indices, there is no consensus as to which index should be used for CLP populations.
To systematically review the available literature on the indices used to assess the occlusal schemes in dental models of CLP patients, with respect to the most commonly used index and the index that most fulfils the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria.
Ten electronic databases, grey literature, and reference list searches were conducted.
The inclusion criteria consisted of studies that aimed to assess a particular malocclusion index on study models of patients with CLP.
Full articles were retrieved from abstracts/titles that appeared to have met the inclusion -exclusion criteria which were subsequently reviewed using more detailed criteria for a final selection decision. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool was used to appraise the methodological quality of the finally included studies. Due to the heterogeneity of the data, only a qualitative analysis was performed.
A total of 13 studies met the inclusion -exclusion criteria. These studies revealed seven utilized indices, namely the GOSLON Yardstick, Five-Year-Old, Bauru-Bilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Yardstick, Huddart -Bodenham, Modified Huddart -Bodenham, EUROCRAN Yardstick, and GOAL Yardstick. The GOSLON Yardstick was the most commonly used index, and the Modified Huddart -Bodenham performed the best according to the WHO criteria.
Current evidence suggests that the Modified Huddart -Bodenham Index equalled or outperformed the rest of the indices on all the WHO criteria and that the GOSLON Yardstick was the most commonly used index, possibly due to a longer time in use. Therefore, the Modified Huddart -Bodenham could be considered as the standard to measure outcomes of patients with CLP.
目前已有多种指数可用于评估唇腭裂（CLP）患者的错畸形严重程度；尽管这些指数已经问世一段时间了，但对于 CLP 人群应使用哪种指数，尚无共识。
系统回顾评估 CLP 患者牙颌模型的咬合类型的可用文献，评估最常使用的指数和最符合世界卫生组织（WHO）标准的指数。
对 10 个电子数据库、灰色文献和参考文献进行检索。
纳入研究旨在评估 CLP 患者研究模型中特定错畸形指数的研究。
从看似符合纳入排除标准的摘要/标题中检索全文，并使用更详细的标准进行进一步审查，以做出最终选择决定。使用诊断准确性研究质量评估工具评估最终纳入研究的方法学质量。由于数据的异质性，仅进行了定性分析。
共有 13 项研究符合纳入排除标准。这些研究揭示了七种使用的指数，即 GOSLON 尺度、五岁、Bauru-双侧唇腭裂尺度、Huddart-Bodenham、改良 Huddart-Bodenham、EUROCRAN 尺度和 GOAL 尺度。GOSLON 尺度是最常用的指数，改良 Huddart-Bodenham 根据 WHO 标准表现最佳。
现有证据表明，改良 Huddart-Bodenham 指数在所有 WHO 标准上与其他指数相当或优于其他指数，而 GOSLON 尺度是最常用的指数，可能是因为使用时间更长。因此，改良 Huddart-Bodenham 指数可被视为衡量 CLP 患者治疗结果的标准。
