Jawad Z, Bates C, Hodge T
Leeds Dental Institute.
Br Dent J. 2016 May 27;220(10):527-32. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2016.377.
Aim To determine whether dental registrants can use the dental health component (DHC) and aesthetic component (AC) of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN) 'accurately' to an acceptable level of agreement and diagnostic validity.Method Participants from six different registrant groups were asked to score the IOTN for 14 cases based on study models and photographs as well as completing a short questionnaire. Participants in the study were all recruited at study days and annual conferences. The main outcome measures include the different registrant groups IOTN scores compared to expert panel scores using kappa statistics. To assess for diagnostic validity, individual participants sensitivity and specificity scores were calculated.Result Overall, 229 registrants took part in the study. For the DHC the specialist orthodontist (SO), postgraduate orthodontic student (PGOS) and the qualified orthodontic therapist (QOT) groups achieved a mean kappa ≥0.60 indicating 'acceptable' agreement with the expert panel scores. The dental foundation trainee (DFT) and general dental practitioner (GDP) group achieved a mean kappa of 0.20 and 0.22 respectively indicating poor and fair agreement. The student orthodontic therapist (SOT) group achieved a mean kappa of 0.55 indicating moderate agreement. For the AC none of the registrant groups achieved an acceptable level of agreement with the mean kappa scores for the different groups ranging from kappa 0.13-0.21, indicating poor to fair agreement.Conclusion Overall agreement for the DHC was varied for the different registrant groups ranging from fair to substantial agreement. Registrants were better at applying the DHC compared to the AC with agreement ranging from poor to fair. More needs to done to help registrants use the IOTN more 'accurately'.
目的 确定牙科注册人员是否能够“准确地”使用正畸治疗需求指数(IOTN)的牙齿健康成分(DHC)和美学成分(AC),以达到可接受的一致性水平和诊断效度。
方法 邀请来自六个不同注册人员组的参与者,根据研究模型、照片对14个病例的IOTN进行评分,并完成一份简短问卷。研究中的参与者均在研究日和年度会议上招募。主要观察指标包括使用kappa统计量将不同注册人员组的IOTN评分与专家小组评分进行比较。为评估诊断效度,计算了个体参与者的敏感度和特异度评分。
结果 总体而言,229名注册人员参与了该研究。对于DHC,专科正畸医生(SO)、正畸研究生(PGOS)和合格正畸治疗师(QOT)组的平均kappa值≥0.60,表明与专家小组评分具有“可接受的”一致性。牙科基础培训学员(DFT)和普通牙科医生(GDP)组的平均kappa值分别为0.20和0.22,表明一致性较差和一般。正畸治疗师学生(SOT)组的平均kappa值为0.55,表明一致性中等。对于AC,没有一个注册人员组达到可接受的一致性水平,不同组的平均kappa值在0.13 - 0.21之间,表明一致性从差到一般。
结论 不同注册人员组对DHC的总体一致性各不相同,从一般到高度一致。与AC相比,注册人员在应用DHC方面表现更好,一致性从差到一般。需要做更多工作来帮助注册人员更“准确地”使用IOTN。