Buchanan I B, Russell J I, Clark J D
Orthodontic Department, Glasgow Dental Hospital and School, U.K.
Br J Orthod. 1996 Nov;23(4):351-7. doi: 10.1179/bjo.23.4.351.
A retrospective assessment of treatment outcome in a group of 82 orthodontic fixed appliance cases was carried out using the Peer Assessment Rating Index (PAR) in order to explore the usefulness of the PAR index as a means of differentiating the change associated with treatment. Two different fixed appliance techniques, the pre-adjusted Edgewise and the Begg appliance had been used to treat these cases, and all had been under the care of one Consultant Orthodontist. The mean percentage reduction in PAR for the group as a whole was 74 per cent. Comparison of the two different appliance types found that the pre-adjusted Edgewise group achieved a significantly greater reduction in PAR score (81 per cent), than the Begg group (65 per cent). Cases with a low PAR score prior to treatment tended to fare more poorly in terms of percentage reduction and this was more marked for those cases treated with the Begg appliance. Although the PAR index has a high degree of reproducibility, it was found that even the small error present can lead to problems of interpretation if the nomogram categories are used as a method of comparison. Some potential problems in undertaking studies such as this using the PAR index to assess treatment outcome are discussed.
为了探究同伴评估等级指数（PAR）作为区分与治疗相关变化的一种手段的实用性，对一组82例正畸固定矫治病例的治疗结果进行了回顾性评估。采用了两种不同的固定矫治技术，即预成方丝弓矫治技术和Begg矫治技术来治疗这些病例，且所有病例均由一位正畸顾问医师负责。整个组PAR的平均降低百分比为74%。对两种不同矫治器类型的比较发现，预成方丝弓矫治组的PAR得分降低幅度（81%）显著大于Begg矫治组（65%）。治疗前PAR得分低的病例在降低百分比方面往往表现较差，对于那些采用Begg矫治器治疗的病例更为明显。尽管PAR指数具有高度的可重复性，但发现如果将列线图类别用作比较方法，即使存在的小误差也可能导致解释问题。讨论了使用PAR指数评估治疗结果进行此类研究时的一些潜在问题。
