Comparison of orthodontic treatment outcomes in educational and private practice settings.

An accredited graduate orthodontic program provides advanced specialty education to meet standards of care mandated by the ADA, including both didactic and clinical components with defined outcome measures. To quantify these measures, the quality of care provided by graduate orthodontic students was compared to that of orthodontists in private practice. The quality of care was studied in two different delivery settings in the Columbus, Ohio, area-private practice orthodontists (PPO) and the OSU graduate orthodontic clinic (GOC). The Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Occlusal Index was used as a measure of malocclusion severity and post-treatment occlusal outcome. Quality of care was measured using post-treatment PAR, percent PAR reduction, and treatment duration. At baseline, no differences were seen in the gender and pre-PAR scores of patients treated by the PPO and GOC, but statistically significant differences were seen in patients' pre-treatment age, race, and starting dentition. When the post-treatment occlusal results were compared, no statistically significant differences were seen in post-PAR scores and percent PAR reduction between the PPO and GOC. A statistically significant difference was seen in treatment duration (p = 0.002), which was longer in the PPO even after controlling for confounding factors such as pre-treatment age, gender, race, starting dentition, and treatment stages. Our conclusion is that there was no statistically significant difference in the occlusal outcome between the PPO and GOC, but there was a significant difference in the treatment duration.

[1]  P L Sadowsky,et al.  Orthodontic outcomes assessment using the peer assessment rating index. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.

[2]  G. Willems,et al.  Treatment and standard evaluation using the Peer Assessment Rating index , 2001, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[3]  K. Vig,et al.  Developing outcome measures in orthodontics that reflect patient and provider values. , 1999, Seminars in orthodontics.

[4]  B. Ingervall,et al.  Treatment results in dental school orthodontic patients in 1983 and 1993. , 1999, The Angle orthodontist.

[5]  S. E. Owens,et al.  Objective grading system for dental casts and panoramic radiographs. American Board of Orthodontics. , 1998, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[6]  J. Mcdonald,et al.  The influence of operator changes on orthodontic treatment times and results in a postgraduate teaching environment. , 1998, European journal of orthodontics.

[7]  K. Vig,et al.  The effectiveness of Class II, division 1 treatment. , 1995, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[8]  K. Vig,et al.  The validation of the Peer Assessment Rating index for malocclusion severity and treatment difficulty. , 1995, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[9]  S. Richmond,et al.  Orthodontics in the general dental service of England and Wales: a critical assessment of standards , 1993, British Dental Journal.

[10]  R. Smith,et al.  The duration of orthodontic treatment. , 1992, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[11]  S Richmond,et al.  The PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): methods to determine outcome of orthodontic treatment in terms of improvement and standards. , 1992, European journal of orthodontics.

[12]  C D Stephens,et al.  The development of the PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): reliability and validity. , 1992, European journal of orthodontics.

[13]  S. Richmond,et al.  Quality control in orthodontics: risk/benefit considerations , 1991, British Dental Journal.

[14]  Dental practice parameters. Parameters for 12 oral health conditions. Adopted by the American Dental Association House of Delegates. October 1995. , 1996, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[15]  M. Sinioris,et al.  Epidemiology and Health Care Quality Management , 1995 .