Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao American Journal of ...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Article . 2001 . Peer-reviewed
License: Elsevier TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Role of lateral cephalograms in assessing severity and difficulty of orthodontic cases

Authors: E K, Pae; G A, McKenna; T J, Sheehan; R, Garcia; A, Kuhlberg; R, Nanda;

Role of lateral cephalograms in assessing severity and difficulty of orthodontic cases

Abstract

To assess the role of lateral cephalometric films in the evaluation of orthodontic patients, 16 certified orthodontists examined 80 sets of dental casts and lateral cephalograms. The patients included 5 subgroups: Class I with mild crowding, Class II Division 2, Class III, open bites, and bimaxillary protrusion. A 5-point Visual Analogue Scale was used to assess the degree of severity and difficulty of each case. Severity was defined as the degree of deviation from ideal occlusion, while difficulty was defined as the probability of attaining an ideal occlusion when all treatment options were available. The examiner then chose one or more of the following treatment options: growth modification, extraction, nonextraction, and surgery. All examiners scored the degree of severity and difficulty of each case with casts only at Time 1 (T1), then with casts and cephalograms at Time 2 (T2). The observed ratings from the Visual Analogue Scale were scored by using the Rasch model, which transforms the nonlinear ordinal ratings to a linear interval scale. Intersubgroup differences and differences between T1 and T2 difficulty and severity were assessed by using a 5 x 2 repeated measures analysis of variance. A paired t test examined the amount and direction of the differences between T1 and T2 of each subgroup. Multiple contingency tables were used to compare treatment option changes between all subgroups at each time. Severity and difficulty scores highly correlated. Analysis of variance showed significant differences among subgroups for both severity and difficulty; however, there were significant time differences for severity only. Paired t tests revealed a small increase in severity for the bimaxillary protrusive group and small but significant decreases for the subgroups Class II Division 2 and Class III when cephalograms were added. The multicontingency table analysis demonstrated that a significant number of examiners did change their treatment options at T2 for bimaxillary protrusive, nonextraction, and Class II Division 2 patients. It was concluded that lateral cephalometric films showed a significant influence on a clinician's determination on severity of some types of orthodontic malocclusions.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Male, Observer Variation, Analysis of Variance, Chi-Square Distribution, Models, Statistical, Time Factors, Adolescent, Cephalometry, Episode of Care, Reproducibility of Results, Prognosis, Severity of Illness Index, Models, Dental, Orthodontics, Corrective, Linear Models, Humans, Female, Malocclusion

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    23
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
23
Top 10%
Top 10%
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!