Influence of examiner differences on KIG-classification when assessing malocclusions;Einfluss von Untersucherunterschieden auf die KIG-Einstufung bei der Erhebung von Dysgnathiesymptomen

Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics

Volumn 67, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 81-91

  Gesch, Dietmar ^a   Kirbschus, Antje ^a   Schröder, Wiebke ^b   Bernhardt, Olaf ^a   Proff, Peter ^a   Bayerlein, Thomas ^a   Gedrange, Tomasz ^a   Kocher, Thomas ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GREIFSWALD   (Germany)

^b Private Practice   (Germany)

Author keywords

Examiner agreement; Examiner differences; Index; Malocclusions

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; FEMALE; GERMANY; HEALTH INSURANCE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MALOCCLUSION; ORTHODONTICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SYMPTOM;

FEMALE; GERMANY; HUMANS; MALOCCLUSION; OBSERVER VARIATION; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

EID: 33645346230     PISSN: 14345293     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00056-006-5037-0     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Baume LJ. Uniform methods for the epidemiologic assessment of malocclusion. Results obtained with the World Health Organization standard methods (1962 und 1971) in South Pacific populations. Am J Orthod 1974;66:251-72.
2. Bentele MJ, Vig KW, Shanker S, et al. Efficacy of training dental students in the index of orthodontic treatment need. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002;122:456-62.
3. Brook PH, Shaw WC. The development of an index of orthodontic treatment priority. Eur J Orthod 1989;11:309-20.
4. Buchanan IB, Downing A, Stirrups DR. A comparison of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need applied clinically and to diagnostic records. Br J Orthod 1994;21:185-88.
5. Burden DJ, Pine CM, Burnside G. Modified IOTN: An orthodontic treatment need index for use in oral health surveys. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2001;29:220-5.
6. Cohen J. Weighted Kappa. Nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement of partial credit. Psychol Bull 1968;70: 213-20.
7. Du SQ, Rinchuse DJ, Zullo TG. Reliability of three methods of occlusion classification. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;113:463-70.
8. Espeland LV, Ivarsson K, Stenvik A. A new Norwegian index of orthodontic treatment need related to orthodontic concern among 11-year-olds and their parents. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1992;20:274-79.
9. Firestone AR, Beck FM, Beglin FM, et al. Validity of the Index of Complexity, Outcome, and Need (ICON) in determining orthodontic treatment need. Angle Orthod 2002;72:15-20.
10. Fleiss JL. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1981.
11. Gesch D, Bernhardt O, Alte D, et al. Malocclusions and clinical signs or subjective symptoms of temporomandibular disorders (TMD) in adults. Results of the population-based Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP). J Orofac Orthop 2004;65:88-103.
12. Gesch D, Bernhardt O, Alte D, et al. Prevalence of signs and symptoms of temporomandibular disorders in an urban and rural German population: Results of a population-based Study of Health in Pomerania. Quintessence Int 2004;35:143-50.
13. Gesch D, Bernhardt O, Kirbschus A. Association of malocclusion and functional occlusion with temporomandibular disorders (TMD) in adults: A systematic review of population-based studies. Quintessence Int 2004;35:211-21.
14. Gesch D, Bernhardt O, Kocher T, et al. Association of malocclusion and functional occlusion with signs of temporomandibular disorders in adults. Results of the population-based Study of Health in Pomerania. Angle Orthod 2004;74:512-20.
15. Gesch D, Bernhardt O, Mack F, et al. Occlusion and subjective temporomandibular joint symptoms in men and women. Results of the Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP). Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 2004;114:573-80.
16. Gesch D, Bernhardt O, Mack F, et al. Association of malocclusion and functional occlusion with subjective symptoms of TMD in adults: Results of the Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP). Angle Orthod 2005;75:183-90.
17. Hensel E, Born G, Körber V, et al. Prevalence of defined symptoms of malocclusion among probands enrolled in the Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP) in the age group from 20 to 49 years. J Orofac Orthop 2003;64:157-66.
18. Hensel E, Gesch D, Biffar R, et al. Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP): A health survey in an East German region. Objectives and design of the oral health section. Quintessence Int 2003;34:370-78.
19. Jarvinen S. Indexes for orthodontic treatment need. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;120:237-39.
20. John U, Greiner B, Hensel E, et al. Study of Health In Pomerania (SHIP): a health examination survey in an east German region: Objectives and design. Soz Praventivmed 2001;46:186-94.
21. Jones CM, Woods K, O'Brien K, et al. Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need, its use in a dental epidemiology survey calibration exercise. Community Dent Health 1996;13:208-10.
22. Keeling SD, McGorray S, Wheeler TT, et al. Imprecision in orthodontic diagnosis: Reliability of clinical measures of malocclusion. Angle Orthod 1996;66:381-91.
23. Lee R, MacFarlane T, O'Brien K. Consistency of orthodontic treatment planning decisions. Clin Orthod Res 1999;2:79-84.
24. Lunn H, Richmond S, Mitropoulos C. The use of the index of orthodontic treatment need (IOTN) as a public health tool: A pilot study. Community Dent Health 1993;10:111-21.
25. McGorray SP, Wheeler TT, Keeling SD, et al. Evaluation of orthodontists' perception of treatment need and the peer assessment rating (PAR) index. Angle Orthod 1999;69:325-33.
26. Ovsenik M, Farcnik FM, Verdenik I. Comparison of intra-oral and study cast measurements in the assessment of malocclusion. Eur J Orthod 2004;26:273-77.
27. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Jr., Moray LJ. Prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need in the United States: Estimates from the NHANES III survey. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg 1998;13:97-106.
28. Richmond S, Shaw WC, O'Brien KD, et al. The development of the PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): Reliability and validity. Eur J Orthod 1992;14:125-39.
29. Richmond S, Shaw WC, Roberts CT, et al. The PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): Methods to determine outcome of orthodontic treatment in terms of improvement and standards. Eur J Orthod 1992;14:180-87.
30. Richmond S, O'Brien KD, Roberts CT, et al. Dentists variation in the determination of orthodontic treatment need. Br J Orthod 1994; 21:65-68.
31. Richmond S, Buchanan IB, Burden DJ, et al. Calibration of dentists in the use of occlusal indices. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1995;23:173-76.
32. Richmond S, Daniels CP. International comparisons of professional assessments in orthodontics: Part 1 - treatment need. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;113:180-85.
33. Richmond S, Daniels CP. International comparisons of professional assessments in orthodontics: Part 2 - treatment outcome. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;113:324-28.
34. Roberts CT, Richmond S. The design and analysis of reliability studies for the use of epidemiological and audit indices in orthodontics. Br J Orthod 1997;24:139-47.
35. Schopf P. Die kieferorthopädischen Indikationsgruppen. 2 ed. Augsburg: Pröll Druck und Verlag, 2001.
36. Younis JW, Vig KW, Rinchuse DJ, et al. A validation study of three indexes of orthodontic treatment need in the United States. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1997;25:358-62.