Treatment outcome in a graduate orthodontic clinic using the American Board of Orthodontics grading system

Yang-Powers, Linda C.; Sadowsky, Cyril; Rosenstein, Sheldon W.; BeGole, Ellen A.

doi:10.1067/mod.2002.128464

Cited by 52 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…18 The variable of interproximal contacts received the lowest score. These findings are in accordance with the results reported by Yang-Powers et al, 20 who also reported that buccolingual inclination achieved the highest score and interproximal contacts had the lowest scores for both groups. The authors suggested that the lack of proper torque control of the posterior segments is related to the difficulty in either recognizing or correcting the problem.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 95%

“…However, the variable of root angulation was omitted. A smaller percentage of cases passing the ABO examination was assessed in a study by Yang-Powers et al 20 They compared 92 patients treated in a university program and 32 cases previously presented to the ABO, and reported success rates of 19.6% and 46.9%, respectively. Pinskaya et al 18 The results of this study indicated that buccolingual inclination scored the highest in both treatment groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…14-20 These advantages have led to the widespread use of the ABO-OGS in assessing treatment outcomes. [15][16][17][18][19][20][21] Our aims in this study were to identify, through discriminant analysis, a bias-free sample of borderline extraction and nonextraction Class I patients and to compare their treatment outcomes with the ABO-OGS. The investigated parameters were the occlusion and the root angulation criteria established by the ABO.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Treatment outcomes after extraction and nonextraction treatment evaluated with the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system

Anthopoulou

Konstantonis

Makou

2014

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 95%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Treatment outcomes after extraction and nonextraction treatment evaluated with the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system

Anthopoulou

Konstantonis

Makou

2014

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Several studies have evaluated the severity of malocclusion using the discrepancy index (DI), 7 whereas clinical orthodontic outcomes can be tested using occlusal indices, such as peer assessment rating (PAR) and the objective grading system (OGS). 8,9 There have been several biomechanical and laboratory studies 2,10,11 and case reports 12 related to lingual appliances, but only a few clinical studies 1,6 have compared their clinical outcome with that of labial appliances. Furthermore, these clinical studies are rather outdated and therefore have limited relevance to modern lingual appliances, which have undergone significant improvements in terms of bracket design, methods of setup, and indirect bonding techniques.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Outcome assessment of lingual and labial appliances compared with cephalometric analysis, peer assessment rating, and objective grading system in Angle Class II extraction cases

Deguchi

Terao

Aonuma

et al. 2014

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A very limited number of research studies have assessed differences between orthodontic treatment outcomes derived in university clinic settings and in private practices. 2,3 Therefore, it remains still unclear whether the clinical skills of a private orthodontist can outweigh the detailed and supervised practice of a university graduate student.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

University clinic and private practice treatment outcomes in Class I extraction and nonextraction patients: A comparative study with the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System

Mislik

Konstantonis

Katsadouris

et al. 2016

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION The aim of this study was to compare treatment outcomes in university vs private practice settings with Class I patients using the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System. METHODS A parent sample of 580 Class I patients treated with and without extractions of 4 first premolars was subjected to discriminant analysis to identify a borderline spectrum of 66 patients regarding the extraction modality. Of these patients, 34 were treated in private orthodontic practices, and 32 were treated in a university graduate orthodontic clinic. The treatment outcomes were evaluated using the 8 variables of the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System. RESULTS The total scores ranged from 10 to 47 (mean, 25.44; SD, 9.8) for the university group and from 14 to 45 (mean, 25.94; SD, 7.7) for the private practice group. The university group achieved better scores for the variables of buccolingual inclination (mean difference, 2.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59, 3.98; P = 0.01) and marginal ridges (mean difference, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.28, 2.36; P = 0.01), and the private practice group achieved a better score for the variable of root angulation (mean difference, -0.65; 95% CI, -1.26, -0.03; P = 0.04). However, no statistically intergroup differences were found between the total American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System scores (mean difference, -0.5; 95% CI, -3.82, 4.82; P = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS Patients can receive similar quality of orthodontic treatment in a private practice and a university clinic. The orthodontists in the private practices were more successful in angulating the roots properly, whereas the orthodontic residents accomplished better torque control of the posterior segments and better marginal ridges. ABSTRACT Aim:The aims of this study were to compare treatment outcomes in university vs private practice, Class I patients, by using the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system (ABO-OGS). Materials and Method:A parent sample of 580 Class I patients treated with or without extractions of four first premolars was subjected to discriminant analysis in order to identify a borderline spectrum of 66 patients regarding to the extraction modality. Of these patients, 34were treated in private orthodontic practices and 32 in a university graduate orthodontic clinic. The treatment outcomes were evaluated using the 8 variables of the ABO-OGS. Results:The total score ranged from 10 to 47 (mean, 25.44; SD 9.8) Conclusions:Patients can receive similar quality of orthodontic treatment in a private practice or in a university clinic. Orthodontists in a private practice were more successful in angulating the roots properly whereas orthodontic residents accomplished better torque control of the posterior segments and better marginal ridges.

show abstract

Treatment outcome in a graduate orthodontic clinic using the American Board of Orthodontics grading system

Cited by 52 publications

References 5 publications

Treatment outcomes after extraction and nonextraction treatment evaluated with the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system

Treatment outcomes after extraction and nonextraction treatment evaluated with the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system

Outcome assessment of lingual and labial appliances compared with cephalometric analysis, peer assessment rating, and objective grading system in Angle Class II extraction cases

University clinic and private practice treatment outcomes in Class I extraction and nonextraction patients: A comparative study with the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About