Parker W S
Department of Health Services, State of California, and School of Medicine, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, USA.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998 Aug;114(2):134-41. doi: 10.1053/od.1998.v114.a90444.
The malocclusion index problem arises because of the need to identify which patient's treatments will be paid for with tax dollars. Both the civilian (Medicaid) and military (Champus) programs in the United States require that "need" be demonstrated. Need is defined as "medically necessary handicapping malocclusion" in Medicaid parlance. It is defined by Champus as "seriously handicapping malocclusion." The responsible specialty organization (the AAO) first approved the Salzmann Index in 1969 for this purpose and then reversed course in 1985 and took a formal position against the use of any index. Dentistry has historically chosen a state of occlusal perfection as ideal and normal and declared that variation was not normal hence abnormal and thus malocclusion. This "ideal" composes from 1% to 2% of the population and fails all statistical standards. Many indexes have been proposed based on variations from this "ideal" and fail for that reason. They are not logical. The HLD (CalMod) Index is a lawsuit-driven modification of some 1960 suggestions by Dr. Harry L. Draker. It proposes to identify the worst looking malocclusions as handicapping and offers a cut-off point to identify them. In addition, the modification includes two situations known to be destructive to tissue and structures. As of Jan. 1, 1998, the California program has had 135,655 patients screened by qualified orthodontists using this index. Of that number, 49,537 patients have had study models made and screened by qualified orthodontists using the index. Two separate studies have been performed to examine results and to identify problems. Necessary changes have been made and guidelines produced. The index problem has proven to be very dynamic in application. The HLD (CalMod) Index has been successfully applied and tested in very large numbers. This article is published as a factual review of the situation regarding the index question and one solution in the United States.
错颌指数问题的出现是因为需要确定哪些患者的治疗费用将由纳税人支付。美国的民用(医疗补助)和军事(军人家属医疗补助计划)项目都要求证明“必要性”。在医疗补助的说法中,“必要性”被定义为“医学上必需的致残性错颌”。军人家属医疗补助计划将其定义为“严重致残性错颌”。负责的专业组织(美国正畸医师协会)于1969年首次批准萨尔兹曼指数用于此目的,然后在1985年改变立场,正式反对使用任何指数。从历史上看,牙科将咬合完美状态视为理想和正常状态,并宣称偏差不正常,因此是异常的,也就是错颌。这种“理想”状态在人群中占1%到2%,不符合所有统计标准。基于与这种“理想”状态的偏差提出了许多指数,但都因此而失败。它们不合理。HLD(加州改良版)指数是由哈利·L·德雷克博士在1960年的一些建议基础上,因诉讼驱动而进行的修改。它提议将外观最难看的错颌认定为致残性错颌,并提供一个临界点来识别它们。此外,该修改还包括已知对组织和结构有破坏作用的两种情况。截至1998年1月1日,加利福尼亚州的项目已有135,655名患者由合格的正畸医生使用该指数进行筛查。在这些患者中,有49,537名患者制作了研究模型,并由合格的正畸医生使用该指数进行筛查。已经进行了两项独立研究来检查结果并识别问题。已经做出了必要的改变并制定了指导方针。事实证明,指数问题在应用中非常多变。HLD(加州改良版)指数已在大量人群中成功应用和测试。本文作为对美国指数问题现状及一种解决方案的事实性综述发表。