TODENTJ-25-03-2019_TODENTJ-12-896
1553507595
Bentham Open
doi@benthamopen.net
Bentham Open
The Open Dentistry Journal
TODENTJ
1874-2106
10
30
2018
12
1
Assessing Treatment Outcomes of a Graduate Orthodontic Program
Anastasia
Pariskou
Athanasios E.
Athanasiou
Objectives:
To assess treatment outcomes of a graduate orthodontic program during two different periods.
Materials and Methods:
Consecutive orthodontic patients’ files were selected from the archives of the Graduate Orthodontic Program, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece. Following the application of certain inclusion criteria, the final sample consisted of 109 patients. The sample was allocated into two groups depending on the time of treatment [Group A: 1998-2003, (n=60); Group B: 2004-2009 (n=49)]. The first period started a few years after the inception of the program and the second 10 years later. All pre- and post-treatment dental casts were blindly assessed by one investigator using the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) and the Index of Complexity, Outcome and Need (ICON). Statistical analysis included Student’s t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, Pearson Chi-Square test and Spearman correlation coefficient. The level of significance was set at p < 0.05.
Results:
In Group A, the mean PAR index changed from 28.6 before treatment to 5.5 after treatment and the mean ICON index changed from 71.9 to 23.5. In Group B, the mean PAR index changed from 23.6 before treatment to 4 after treatment and the mean ICON index changed from 62.8 to 19.8. The mean PAR score reduction was 78.4% for the 1st group and 81.4% for the 2nd group, respectively. Ninety percent of the cases of Group A and 89.8% of the cases of Group B had a post-treatment ICON score < 31. The severity of the initial malocclusion was found to be positively correlated with the treatment occlusal outcome. Out of the 109 cases, 68 were considered as substantially or greatly improved, 29 moderately improved, 8 showed minimal improvement and 4 cases were considered as not improved or worse. The mean PAR percentage improvement and the ICON score at the end of treatment were not correlated to the presence or absence of tooth extractions in the treatment plan. There was no correlation between the treatment outcome and the number of graduate residents involved in the therapy. The treatment outcomes were not correlated to the gender or age of patients.
Conclusion:
Patients treated by graduate orthodontic residents during 1998-2009 demonstrated significant improvement of their occlusion and the quality of the treatment remained constant throughout the years. The outcome of orthodontic treatment was not correlated to the gender and the age of patients, the number of postgraduate students performing the treatment, and the presence of tooth extractions in the treatment plan.
10
30
2018
896
903
TODENTJ-12-896
1
10.2174/crossmark_policy
opendentistryjournal.com
benthamopen.com
true
Peer Reviewed
Single blind
Checked with iThenticate
2018-7-22
2018-9-22
2018-10-10
2018-10-30
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode
10.2174/1874210601812010896
1553507595
https://opendentistryjournal.com/VOLUME/12/PAGE/896/
-
https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-896/TODENTJ-12-896.pdf
-
https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-896/TODENTJ-12-896.pdf
-
https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-896/TODENTJ-12-896.pdf
-
https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-896/TODENTJ-12-896.pdf
-
https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-896/TODENTJ-12-896.pdf
-
https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-896/TODENTJ-12-896.pdf
-
https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-896/TODENTJ-12-896.pdf
-
https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V12/TODENTJ-12-896/TODENTJ-12-896.xml
Eur. J. Orthod.
McGuinness N.J.
20
159
1998
10.1093/ejo/20.2.159
McGuinness NJ, McDonald JP.
The influence of operator changes on orthodontic treatment times and results in a postgraduate teaching environment.
Eur J Orthod
1998;
20
(2)
: 159-67.
Eur. J. Orthod.
Hamdan A.M.
21
181
1999
10.1093/ejo/21.2.181
Hamdan AM, Rock WP.
An appraisal of the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Index and a suggested new weighting system.
Eur J Orthod
1999;
21
(2)
: 181-92.
Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.
Yang-Powers L.C.
122
451
2002
10.1067/mod.2002.128464
Yang-Powers LC, Sadowsky C, Rosenstein S, BeGole EA.
Treatment outcome in a graduate orthodontic clinic using the American Board of Orthodontics grading system.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
2002;
122
(5)
: 451-5.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
Knierim K
130
648
2006
Knierim K, Roberts WE, Hartsfield J.
Assessing treatment outcomes for a graduate orthodontics program: Follow-up study for the classes of 2001-2003.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
2006;
130
: 648-55.
Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.
Campbell C.L.
132
822
2007
10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.05.036
Campbell CL, Roberts WE, Hartsfield JK Jr, Qi R.
Treatment outcomes in a graduate orthodontic clinic for cases defined by the American Board of Orthodontics malocclusion categories.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
2007;
132
(6)
: 822-9.
Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.
Vu C.Q.
133
9.e1
2008
10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.08.012
Vu CQ, Roberts WE, Hartsfield JK Jr, Ofner S.
Treatment complexity index for assessing the relationship of treatment duration and outcomes in a graduate orthodontics clinic.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
2008;
133
(1)
: 9.e1-9.e13.
Graham DH.
Should we abolish ranking universities by their reputation?
2003.
Available from: www.vanderbilt.edu/News/register/Jun5_00/ story12.html.Dec
Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.
Abei Y.
126
544
2004
10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.11.020
Abei Y, Nelson S, Amberman BD, Hans MG.
Comparing orthodontic treatment outcome between orthodontists and general dentists with the ABO index.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
2004;
126
(5)
: 544-8.
Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.
Pangrazio-Kulbersh V.
115
544
1999
10.1016/S0889-5406(99)70277-5
Pangrazio-Kulbersh V, Kaczynski R, Shunock M.
Early treatment outcome assessed by the Peer Assessment Rating index.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
1999;
115
(5)
: 544-50.
Eur. J. Orthod.
Richmond S.
14
125
1992
10.1093/ejo/14.2.125
Richmond S, Shaw WC, O’Brien KD, et al.
The development of the PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): Reliability and validity.
Eur J Orthod
1992;
14
(2)
: 125-39.
Eur. J. Orthod.
Richmond S.
14
180
1992
10.1093/ejo/14.3.180
Richmond S, Shaw WC, Roberts CT, Andrews M.
The PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): Methods to determine outcome of orthodontic treatment in terms of improvement and standards.
Eur J Orthod
1992;
14
(3)
: 180-7.
J. Orthod.
Daniels C.
27
149
2000
10.1093/ortho/27.2.149
Daniels C, Richmond S.
The development of the index of complexity, outcome and need (ICON).
J Orthod
2000;
27
(2)
: 149-62.
Eur. J. Orthod.
Evans R.
9
314
1987
10.1093/ejo/9.4.314
Evans R, Shaw W.
Preliminary evaluation of an illustrated scale for rating dental attractiveness.
Eur J Orthod
1987;
9
(4)
: 314-8.
Angle Orthod.
Richmond S.
71
404
2001
Richmond S, Aylott NA, Panahei ME, Rolfe B, Tausche E.
A 2-center comparison of orthodontist’s perceptions of orthodontic treatment difficulty.
Angle Orthod
2001;
71
(5)
: 404-10.
Swed. Dent. J.
Richmond S.
25
137
2001
Richmond S, Ikonomou C, Williams B, Ramel S, Rolfe B, Kurol J.
Orthodontic treatment standards in a public group practice in Sweden.
Swed Dent J
2001;
25
(4)
: 137-44.
Br. J. Orthod.
Roberts C.T.
24
139
1997
10.1093/ortho/24.2.139
Roberts CT, Richmond S.
The design and analysis of reliability studies for the use of epidemiological and audit indices in orthodontics.
Br J Orthod
1997;
24
(2)
: 139-47.
Eur. J. Orthod.
Brown R.
27
286
2005
10.1093/ejo/cjh078
Brown R, Richmond S.
An update on the analysis of agreement for orthodontic indices.
Eur J Orthod
2005;
27
(3)
: 286-91.
Angle Orthod.
Eliades T.
75
147
2005
Eliades T, Athanasiou AE.
Advanced orthodontic education: Evolution of assessment criteria and methods to meet future challenges.
Angle Orthod
2005;
75
(2)
: 147-54.
Angle Orthod.
Firestone A.R.
69
19
1999
Firestone AR, Häsler RU, Ingervall B.
Treatment results in dental school orthodontic patients in 1983 and 1993.
Angle Orthod
1999;
69
(1)
: 19-26.
Hel Orthod Rev
Onyeaso C.O.
9
23
2006
Onyeaso CO, BeGole EA.
Orthodontic treatment standard in an accredited graduate orthodontic clinic in North America assessed using the Index of Complexity, Outcome and Need (ICON).
Hel Orthod Rev
2006;
9
: 23-34.
Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.
Mislik B.
149
253
2016
10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.10.012
Mislik B, Konstantonis D, Katsadouris A, Eliades T.
University clinic and private practice treatment outcomes in Class I extraction and nonextraction patients: A comparative study with the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
2016;
149
(2)
: 253-8.
Eur. J. Orthod.
Birkeland K.
19
279
1997
10.1093/ejo/19.3.279
Birkeland K, Furevik J, Bøe OE, Wisth PJ.
Evaluation of treatment and post-treatment changes by the PAR Index.
Eur J Orthod
1997;
19
(3)
: 279-88.
Br. J. Orthod.
O’Brien K.D.
20
25
1993
10.1179/bjo.20.1.25
O’Brien KD, Shaw WC, Roberts CT.
The use of occlusal indices in assessing the provision of orthodontic treatment by the hospital orthodontic service of England and Wales.
Br J Orthod
1993;
20
(1)
: 25-35.
Br. Dent. J.
Richmond S.
174
315
1993
10.1038/sj.bdj.4808166
Richmond S, Shaw WC, Stephens CD, Webb WG, Roberts CT, Andrews M.
Orthodontics in the general dental service of England and Wales: A critical assessment of standards.
Br Dent J
1993;
174
(9)
: 315-29.
Hel Orthod Rev
Richmond S.
4
9
2001
Richmond S, Ikonomou C, Williams B, et al.
Orthodontic treatment standards in Greece.
Hel Orthod Rev
2001;
4
: 9-20.
Angle Orthod.
Holman J.K.
68
527
1998
Holman JK, Hans MG, Nelson S, Powers MP.
An assessment of extraction versus nonextraction orthodontic treatment using the peer assessment rating (PAR) index.
Angle Orthod
1998;
68
(6)
: 527-34.
J Orthod
Jeremiah HG
39
206
2012
Jeremiah HG, Cousley RR, Newton T, et al.
Treatment time and occlusal outcome of orthognathic therapy in the East of England region.
J Orthod
2012;
39
: 206-11.
Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol.
Turbill E.A.
29
62
2001
10.1034/j.1600-0528.2001.00010.x
Turbill EA, Richmond S, Wright JL.
The time-factor in orthodontics: What influences the duration of treatments in National Health Service practices?
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol
2001;
29
(1)
: 62-72.
Br. J. Orthod.
Taylor P.J.
23
335
1996
10.1179/bjo.23.4.335
Taylor PJ, Kerr WJ, McColl JH.
Factors associated with the standard and duration of orthodontic treatment.
Br J Orthod
1996;
23
(4)
: 335-41.
Eur. J. Orthod.
John W.
16
181
1994
10.1093/ejo/16.3.181
John W, Kerr S, Buchanan IB, McNair FI, McColl JH.
Factors influencing the outcome and duration of removable appliance treatment.
Eur J Orthod
1994;
16
(3)
: 181-6.
J. Clin. Exp. Dent.
González-Gil-de-Bernabé P.
6
e364
2014
10.4317/jced.51512
González-Gil-de-Bernabé P, Bellot-Arcís C, Montiel-Company JM, Gandía-Franco JL.
Evaluation of treatment outcomes in a 3 years post-graduate orthodontic program using the peer assessment rating (par).
J Clin Exp Dent
2014;
6
(4)
: e364-8.
J. Leban. Dent. Assoc.
Elshafee F.I.
51
60
2017
Elshafee FI, Naser-ud-Din S, Khamis AH, Athanasiou AE.
Occlusal outcome assessment of orthodontic treatments performed at an educational institute in Dubai.
J Leban Dent Assoc
2017;
51
: 60-70.