Paschos Ekaterini, Bücher Katharina, Huth Karin C, Crispin Alexander, Wichelhaus Andrea, Dietel Tamina
Department of Orthodontics, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.
Department of Restorative Dentistry, Periodontology and Pediatric Dentistry, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.
Clin Oral Investig. 2014 May;18(4):1351-1358. doi: 10.1007/s00784-013-1076-2. Epub 2013 Aug 8.
The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance and accuracy of four plaque indices for orthodontic patients.
The plaque accumulation of 140 maxillary incisors with bonded brackets was recorded using intra-oral photographs and assessed using four different plaque indices: the orthodontic plaque (OP) index, the modified orthodontic plaque (MOP) index, the Quigley and Hein (QHP) index and the modified Navy plaque (MNP) index. The assessment was performed twice within a time interval of 4 weeks by four different examiner groups: orthodontists, dentists, students and orthodontic assistants.
No significant differences were detected for the OP and MOP indices among the examiner groups. A significant difference was found for the QHP and MNP indices. The inter- and intra-examiner reliability of the OP and MOP indices was good. In contrast, the reliability for the QHP and MNP indices was moderate to poor with few exceptions. The discrimination performance of the OP and MOP indices was excellent. The sum of the sensitivity and specificity was generally lower for the QHP and MNP indices compared with the OP and MOP indices.
OP and MOP indices showed good performance. The QHP and MNP indices are not appropriate for orthodontic purposes.
Traditional plaque indices reflect the typical pattern of plaque accumulation for patients without multi-bracket appliances. The performance of these indices for orthodontic patients has never been investigated. Orthodontic plaque indices that focus on the surface along the gingival margin and areas around the bracket exhibit higher diagnostic performance and accuracy compared with traditional indices.
本研究旨在评估四种菌斑指数对正畸患者的诊断性能和准确性。
使用口腔内照片记录140颗粘结托槽的上颌切牙的菌斑堆积情况，并使用四种不同的菌斑指数进行评估：正畸菌斑（OP）指数、改良正畸菌斑（MOP）指数、奎格利和海因（QHP）指数以及改良海军菌斑（MNP）指数。由四个不同的检查者组（正畸医生、牙医、学生和正畸助理）在4周的时间间隔内进行两次评估。
检查者组之间OP和MOP指数未检测到显著差异。QHP和MNP指数存在显著差异。OP和MOP指数的检查者间和检查者内可靠性良好。相比之下，QHP和MNP指数的可靠性从中度到较差，只有少数例外。OP和MOP指数的辨别性能极佳。与OP和MOP指数相比，QHP和MNP指数的敏感性和特异性之和通常较低。
OP和MOP指数表现良好。QHP和MNP指数不适用于正畸目的。
传统的菌斑指数反映了没有多托槽矫治器的患者菌斑堆积的典型模式。这些指数对正畸患者的性能从未被研究过。与传统指数相比，专注于牙龈边缘表面和托槽周围区域的正畸菌斑指数表现出更高的诊断性能和准确性。
