Literature DB >> 1628684

The PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): methods to determine outcome of orthodontic treatment in terms of improvement and standards.

S Richmond1, W C Shaw, C T Roberts, M Andrews.   

Abstract

In orthodontics it is important to objectively assess whether a worthwhile improvement has been achieved in terms of overall alignment and occlusion for an individual patient or the greater proportion of a practitioner's caseload. An objective measure is described that has been validated against the subjective opinions of 74 dentists. Using the weighted PAR Index it was revealed that at least a 30 per cent reduction in PAR score is required for a case to be considered as 'improved' and a change of 22 PAR points to bring about 'great improvement'. For a practitioner to demonstrate high standards the proportion of an individual's case load falling in the 'worse or no different' category should be negligible and the mean reduction should be as high as possible (e.g. greater than 70 per cent). If the mean percentage reduction in PAR score is high and the proportion of cases that have been 'greatly improved' is also high, this indicates that the practitioner is treating a great proportion of cases with a clear need for treatment to a high standard.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1628684     DOI: 10.1093/ejo/14.3.180

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Orthod        ISSN: 0141-5387            Impact factor:   3.075


  48 in total

1.  Retrospective evaluation of the outcome of orthodontic treatment in adults.

Authors:  T Riedmann; R Berg
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 1.938

2.  Long-term follow-up of Class II adults treated with orthodontic camouflage: a comparison with orthognathic surgery outcomes.

Authors:  Colin A Mihalik; William R Proffit; Ceib Phillips
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 2.650

3.  Evaluation of orthodontic treatment success in patients with pronounced Angle Class III.

Authors:  R Angermann; R Berg
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 1.938

4.  Performance of clear vacuum-formed thermoplastic retainers depending on retention protocol: a systematic review.

Authors:  Eleftherios G Kaklamanos; Maria Kourakou; Dimitrios Kloukos; Ioannis Doulis; Smaragda Kavvadia
Journal:  Odontology       Date:  2016-06-06       Impact factor: 2.634

5.  Evaluation of objective and subjective treatment outcomes in orthodontic cases treated with extraction of a mandibular incisor.

Authors:  Sherry Lee; Fiona A Firth; Florence Bennani; Winifred Harding; Mauro Farella; Joseph S Antoun
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2019-06-12       Impact factor: 2.079

6.  Adult patients' view of orthodontic treatment outcome compared to professional assessments.

Authors:  T Riedmann; T Georg; R Berg
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 1.938

7.  Modifications to Increase Efficiency of the Begg Orthodontic Technique.

Authors:  V Sharma; J Sengupta
Journal:  Med J Armed Forces India       Date:  2011-07-21

8.  Comparison of early treatment outcomes rendered in three different types of malocclusions.

Authors:  Valmy Pangrazio-Kulbersh; He-Kyong Kang; Archana Dhawan; Riyad Al-Qawasmi; Rafael Rocha Pacheco
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2018-03-07       Impact factor: 2.079

9.  Orthodontic Class II:1 treatment-efficiency and outcome quality of Herbst-multibracket appliance therapy.

Authors:  N Bock; J Ruehl; S Ruf
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2017-12-08       Impact factor: 3.573

10.  Measuring orthodontic treatment satisfaction: questionnaire development and preliminary validation.

Authors:  M E Bennett; J F Tulloch; K W Vig; C L Phillips
Journal:  J Public Health Dent       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 1.821

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.