Comparison of peer assessment ratings (PAR) from 1-phase and 2-phase treatment protocols for Class II malocclusions

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

Volumn 123, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 489-496

  King, Gregory J ^a   McGorray, Susan P ^b   Wheeler, Timothy T ^b   Dolce, Calogero ^b   Taylor, Marie ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; DISEASE SEVERITY; EVALUATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KRUSKAL WALLIS TEST; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MALOCCLUSION; MANDIBLE; ORTHODONTICS; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PEER REVIEW; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREMEDICATION; RACE DIFFERENCE; RANDOMIZATION; SEX RATIO; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; SURGICAL ANATOMY; WILCOXON SIGNED RANKS TEST; ADOLESCENT; CHILD; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; INSTRUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; ORTHODONTIC DEVICE; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STATISTICAL MODEL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ACTIVATOR APPLIANCES; ADOLESCENT; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; CHILD; EXTRAORAL TRACTION APPLIANCES; FEMALE; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; MALE; MALOCCLUSION, ANGLE CLASS II; ORTHODONTIC RETAINERS; ORTHODONTICS, CORRECTIVE; PEER REVIEW, HEALTH CARE; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0037607323     PISSN: 08895406     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00045-3     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. King G.J., Wheeler T.T., McGorray S.P., Aiosa L.S., Bloom R.M., Taylor M.G. Orthodontists' perceptions of the impact of phase 1 treatment for Class II malocclusion on phase 2 needs. J Dent Res. 78:1999;1745-1753.
2. Kluemper G.T., Beeman C.S., Hicks E.P. Early orthodontic treatment what are the imperatives? J Am Dent Assoc. 131:2000;613-620.
3. Keeling S.D., Wheeler T.T., King G.J., Garvan C.W., Cohen D.A., Cabassa S., et al. Anteroposterior skeletal and dental changes after early Class II treatment with bionators and headgear. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 113:1998;40-50.
4. Tulloch J.F., Phillips C., Proffit W.R. Benefit of early Class II treatment progress report of a two-phase randomized clinical trial . Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 113:1998;62-72.
5. Ghafari J., Shofer F.S., Jacobsson-Hunt U., Markowitz D.L., Laster L.L. Headgear versus function regulator in the early treatment of Class II, Division 1 malocclusion a randomized clinical trial . Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 113:1998;51-61.
6. Richmond S., Shaw W.C., Roberts C.T., Andrews M. The PAR index (peer assessment rating) methods to determine outcome of orthodontic treatment in terms of improvement and standards . Eur J Orthod. 14:1992;180-187.
7. Richmond S., Shaw W.C., O'Brien K.D., Buchanan I.B., Jones R., Stephens C.D., et al. The development of the PAR index (peer assessment rating) reliability and validity . Eur J Orthod. 14:1992;125-139.
8. DeGuzman L., Bahiraei D., Vig K.W., Vig P.S., Weyant R.J., O'Brien K. The validation of the peer assessment rating index for malocclusion severity and treatment difficulty. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 107:1995;172-176.
9. Birkeland K., Furevik J., Boe O.E., Wisth P.J. Evaluation of treatment and post-treatment changes by the PAR index. Eur J Orthod. 19:1997;279-288.
10. O'Brien K.D., Robbins R., Vig K.W., Vig P.S., Shnorhokian H., Weyant R. The effectiveness of Class II, Division 1 treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 107:1995;329-334.
11. Livieratos F.A., Johnston L.E. Jr. A comparison of one-stage and two-stage nonextraction alternatives in matched Class II samples. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 108:1995;118-131.
12. McKnight M.M., Daniels C.P., Johnston L.E. Jr. A retrospective study of two-stage treatment outcomes assessed with two modified PAR indices. Angle Orthod. 68:1998;521-524.
13. von Bremen J., Pancherz H. Efficiency of early and late Class II Division 1 treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 121:2002;31-37.
14. Dugoni S.A., Lee J.S., Varela J., Dugoni A.A. Early mixed dentition treatment postretention evaluation of stability and relapse . Angle Orthod. 65:1995;311-320.
15. Haruki T., Little R.M. Early versus late treatment of crowded first premolar extraction cases postretention evaluation of stability and relapse . Angle Orthod. 68:1998;61-68.
16. Wheeler T.T., McGorray S.P., Yurkiewicz L., Keeling S.D., King G.J. Orthodontic treatment demand and need in third and fourth grade schoolchildren. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 106:1994;22-33.
17. O'Brien K., McComb J.L., Fox N., Wright J. Factors influencing the uptake of orthodontic treatment. Br J Orthod. 23:1996;331-334.
18. Bergstrom K., Halling A., Huggare J. Orthodontic treatment demand - differences between urban and rural areas. Community Dent Health. 15:1998;272-276.
19. Bishara S.E., Jakobsen J.R., Angelakis D. Posttreatment changes in male and female patients a comparative study . Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 110:1996;624-629.
20. Proffit W.R., Fields H.W. Jr, Moray L.J. Prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need in the United States estimates from the NHANES III survey . Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg. 13:1998;97-106.
21. Burden D.J., McGuinness N., Stevenson M., McNamara T. Predictors of outcome among patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion treated with fixed appliances in the permanent dentition. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 116:1999;452-459.
22. Cureton S.L., Regennitter F.J., Yancey J.M. Clinical versus quantitative assessment of headgear compliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 104:1993;277-284.
23. Karlsen A.T. Association between facial height development and mandibular growth rotation in low and high MP-SN angle faces a longitudinal study . Angle Orthod. 67:1997;103-110.