Camila Pachêco-Pereira1, Noura A Alsufyani2, Michael P Major3, Carlos Flores-Mir4. 1. Oral Radiology Specialty & Assistant Clinical Professor, School of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. Electronic address: Cppereir@ualberta.ca. 2. Oral & Maxillofacial Radiologist - Professor, School of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada; Oral Maxillofacial Radiologist, Assistant Professor, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 3. Director of the Inter-disciplinary Airway Research Clinic & Assistant Clinical Professor in Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. 4. Professor & Orthodontic Graduate Program Director, School of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine how accurate and reliable oral maxillofacial radiologists (OMFRs) are in screening for adenoid hypertrophy when using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging compared with nasopharyngoscopy (NP). STUDY DESIGN: CBCT scans of 10 patients with distinct levels of adenoid hypertrophy were randomly selected. Fourteen board-certified OMFRs classified the levels of hypertrophy. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess accuracy by comparing their diagnosis against an NP diagnosis, which is the reference standard. OMFRs' interreliability was assessed. Kappa statistics were used to analyze dichotomous data from healthy and unhealthy patients. RESULTS: Overall, the reliability among OMFRs was good (ICC = 0.79 with confidence interval [CI] 0.63-0.93). The "statistical mode" was very good (ICC = 0.81; CI 0.43-0.94). The accuracy of OMFRs against NP was good (ICCmean = 0.69; CI 0.43-0.94). On average, the Kappa statistics (Kmean = 0.77; CI 0.62-0.92) demonstrated a good agreement between OMFRs and NP diagnoses. The individualized results from each evaluator were presented and investigated according to their performance. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the reference standard, the accuracy of OMFRs to classify adenoid hypertrophy on a four-level scale was moderate to strong and improved when adenoid hypertrophy was classified as healthy or unhealthy. The reliability of the OMFRs was greater than 80%, assuring their consistency and reliability on screening adenoids hypertrophy via CBCT.
OBJECTIVE: To determine how accurate and reliable oral maxillofacial radiologists (OMFRs) are in screening for adenoid hypertrophy when using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging compared with nasopharyngoscopy (NP). STUDY DESIGN: CBCT scans of 10 patients with distinct levels of adenoid hypertrophy were randomly selected. Fourteen board-certified OMFRs classified the levels of hypertrophy. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess accuracy by comparing their diagnosis against an NP diagnosis, which is the reference standard. OMFRs' interreliability was assessed. Kappa statistics were used to analyze dichotomous data from healthy and unhealthy patients. RESULTS: Overall, the reliability among OMFRs was good (ICC = 0.79 with confidence interval [CI] 0.63-0.93). The "statistical mode" was very good (ICC = 0.81; CI 0.43-0.94). The accuracy of OMFRs against NP was good (ICCmean = 0.69; CI 0.43-0.94). On average, the Kappa statistics (Kmean = 0.77; CI 0.62-0.92) demonstrated a good agreement between OMFRs and NP diagnoses. The individualized results from each evaluator were presented and investigated according to their performance. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the reference standard, the accuracy of OMFRs to classify adenoid hypertrophy on a four-level scale was moderate to strong and improved when adenoid hypertrophy was classified as healthy or unhealthy. The reliability of the OMFRs was greater than 80%, assuring their consistency and reliability on screening adenoids hypertrophy via CBCT.
Authors: Claudine Thereza-Bussolaro; Manuel Lagravère; Camila Pacheco-Pereira; Carlos Flores-Mir Journal: Head Face Med Date: 2020-03-09 Impact factor: 2.151