Are the Peer Assessment Rating Index and the Index of Treatment Complexity, Outcome, and Need suitable measures for orthognathic outcomes?

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine which of two occlusal indices were the most appropriate for use in the assessment of orthognathic outcome. The indices used were the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Index and the Index of Treatment Complexity, Outcome, and Need (ICON). These indices were validated against the subjective assessments of treatment outcome and treatment improvement obtained from a panel of experienced orthodontic consultants. For the subjective assessment, intraexaminer agreement for ranking treatment outcome, from patient study models (30 models), was good. Interexaminer agreement for ranking treatment outcome, in the same way, was good or moderate. Intraexaminer agreement for ranking treatment improvement (30 start and finish pairs of models) was very good or good. Interexaminer agreement for ranking treatment improvement ranged from good to fair. All the patient study models were scored using PAR and ICON. The level of correlation between PAR and ICON scores of treatment outcome and the subjective ranking of treatment outcome was significant (P < 0.001). The level of correlation between PAR and ICON scores of treatment improvement and the subjective ranking of treatment improvement was also significant (P < 0.001). It is concluded that both PAR and ICON are suitable indices for assessing the clinical outcome of combined orthodontic treatment and orthognathic surgery.

Do patients benefit from orthognathic surgery? A systematic review on the effects of elective orthognathic surgery on psychosocial functioning and patient satisfaction

“…Studies satisfied DoE criteria when the Peer Assessment Rating Index (PAR), the index of orthodontic treatment need (IOTN), the index of orthognathic functional treatment need (IOFTN), or the index of complexity, outcome and need (ICON) were reported as the outcome measure for orthognathic surgery. The PAR is a suitable and validated clinical outcome measure for the deviation of a normal occlusion and alignment for the combined orthodontic treatment and orthognathic surgery . The IOFTN is a reliable tool for measuring patient need for orthognathic surgery and has good content validity, and good inter‐rater and moderate‐to‐good intra‐rater reliability .…”

“…for orthognathic surgery. The PAR is a suitable and validated clinical outcome measure for the deviation of a normal occlusion and alignment for the combined orthodontic treatment and orthognathic surgery (22,23). The IOFTN is a reliable tool for measuring patient need for orthognathic surgery (2,24) and has good content validity, and good inter-rater and moderate-to-good intra-rater reliability (25).…”

What Are Orthognathic Patients' Expectations of Treatment Outcome—A Qualitative Study

“…3 In 1990, it was estimated that there were more than 1 million potential orthognathic patients in the United States, and if this figure is applied to the UK, there may be up to one fourth of 1 million patients who would benefit from orthognathic treatment. [4][5][6] Recent Hospital Episodes Statistics data from England have suggested that the number of orthognathic surgical procedures undertaken is increasing year to year. 7 Satisfaction with outcomes of orthognathic treatment is generally high, with most studies reporting 80% to 90% of patients being happy with the result.…”

Validity assessment and determination of the cutoff value for the Index of Complexity, Outcome and Need among 12–13 year-olds in Southern Chinese

“…1,12,13,23,24,25,26,27,28,29 Most scholars concluded that ICON could be a substitute for IOTN, Peer Assessment Rating and Dental Aesthetic Index as a good index for the prediction and evaluation of orthodontic treatment need and treatment outcome. 12,23,25,28,29,30,31 Some scholars believed that the relationship between ICON and Peer Assessment Rating needs to be studied further. 32 …”