Accuracy of digital American Board of Orthodontics Discrepancy Index measurements.

INTRODUCTION A digital analysis that is shown to be accurate will ease the demonstration of initial case complexity. To date, no literature exists on the accuracy of the digital American Board of Orthodontics Discrepancy Index (DI) calculations when applied to pretreatment digital models. METHODS Plaster models were obtained from 45 previous patients with varying degrees of malocclusion. Total DI scores and the target disorders were computed manually with a periodontal probe on the original plaster casts (gold standard) and digitally using Ortho Insight 3D (Motion View Software, Hixson, Tenn) and OrthoCAD (Cadent, Carlstadt, NJ). Intrarater and interrater reliabilities were assessed for 15 subjects using the Spearman rho correlation test. Accuracies of the DI scores and target disorders were assessed for all 45 subjects using Wilcoxon signed ranks tests. RESULTS Intrarater and interrater reliabilities were high for total DI scores and most target disorders (r > 0.8). No significant difference was found between total DI score when measured with OrthoCAD compared with manual calculations. The total DI scores calculated by Ortho Insight 3D were found to be significantly greater than those by manual calculation by 2.71 points. CONCLUSIONS The findings indicate that a DI calculated by Ortho Insight 3D may lead the clinician to overestimate case complexity. OrthoCAD's DI module was demonstrated to be a clinically acceptable alternative to manual calculation of the total scores.

[1]  Manuel O Lagravère,et al.  Reproducibility, reliability and validity of measurements obtained from Cecile3 digital models. , 2009, Brazilian oral research.

[2]  Budi Kusnoto,et al.  Assessing the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system: digital vs plaster dental casts. , 2007, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[3]  Paul W Major,et al.  Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of plaster vs digital study models: comparison of peer assessment rating and Bolton analysis and their constituent measurements. , 2006, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[4]  Manuel O Lagravère,et al.  Accuracy of laser-scanned models compared to plaster models and cone-beam computed tomography. , 2014, The Angle orthodontist.

[5]  S. E. Owens,et al.  The ABO discrepancy index: a measure of case complexity. , 2004, 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]  Oded Zilberman,et al.  Evaluation of the validity of tooth size and arch width measurements using conventional and three-dimensional virtual orthodontic models. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.

[7]  Allen R Firestone,et al.  The accuracy and reliability of measurements made on computer-based digital models. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.

[8]  Thomas J Cangialosi,et al.  Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models. , 2003, 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]  U Hägg,et al.  Virtual model analysis as an alternative approach to plaster model analysis: reliability and validity. , 2010, European journal of orthodontics.

[10]  G. Maupomé,et al.  The relationship between the ABO discrepancy index and treatment duration in a graduate orthodontic clinic. , 2011, The Angle orthodontist.

[11]  W. Roberts,et al.  Treatment complexity index for assessing the relationship of treatment duration and outcomes in a graduate orthodontics clinic. , 2008, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[12]  J. Fischer,et al.  A comparison of 3 computerized Bolton tooth-size analyses with a commonly used method. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.

[13]  Thomas J Cangialosi,et al.  Evaluation of the accuracy of digital model analysis for the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system for dental casts. , 2005, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[14]  A. Johal,et al.  Orthodontic measurements on digital study models compared with plaster models: a systematic review. , 2011, Orthodontics & craniofacial research.

[15]  Athanasios E Athanasiou,et al.  Factors affecting the duration of orthodontic treatment: a systematic review. , 2008, European journal of orthodontics.

[16]  Redmond Wr Digital models: a new diagnostic tool. , 2001 .

[17]  W. Wiltshire,et al.  Future practice plans of orthodontic residents in the United States. , 2009, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[18]  M. Hans,et al.  Evaluation of a software program for applying the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system to digital casts. , 2008, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[19]  Otuyemi Od,et al.  Methods of Assessing and Grading Malocclusion: A Review , 1995, Australian orthodontic journal.

[20]  A F Ayoub,et al.  Assessment of the Accuracy of a Three-Dimensional Imaging System for Archiving Dental Study Models , 2003, Journal of orthodontics.