摘要
目的通过对一批正畸治疗完成病例的治疗效果分别进行主观评价和客观评价,比较两种评价方法所得结果的一致性和可靠性,为建立合理的正畸疗效评价方法提供依据。方法按照错牙合畸形的分布比例随机选择各类完成治疗的错牙合畸形病例96例,由6名正畸专科医师对以上每组病例治疗的满意程度按主观评价排出顺序,6名参与主观评价医生排序评分的平均值作为每个病例的主观评价结果。另由4名不参加主观评价的医师参照PAR指数(Peer assessment rating,PAR)对以上病例分别从牙齿错位、后牙咬合关系、覆盖、覆牙合、中线等五个方面进行客观测量和评分,经过加权处理后将其平均分作为客观评价结果。将主观和客观评价的结果进行比较,判断主观和客观评价的一致性,用Pearson相关分析判断主观和客观评价的相关性。结果将主观和客观这两种评价方法所得出的结果比较后发现,两种评价方法的结果一致性较好,43.6%的病例主客观评价的顺序完全一致,对于排名靠前和排名靠后的病例,主客观评价具有高度的一致性。而对于中间段的病例,主观评价结果的区分度要高于客观评价结果的区分度。客观评价的覆盖测量值显示与主观评价具有最高的相关性,相关系数为0.583(P<0.001)。结论在对正畸病例治疗结果进行评价时,为使评价结果更加准确、合理,可采用主观和客观相结合的评价方法 。
Objective To provide a basis for establishing a reasonable evaluation method of orthodontic treatment, the therapeutic effects of a group of orthodontic cases treatment were evaluated by subjective evaluation and objective evaluation, and the consistency and reliability of the two methods were compared. Methods 96 patients of all kinds of malocclusion were selected from 1269 patients finished in Hangzhou stomatology hospital. They were divided in to 8 groups,each contained 12 cases and including all kinds of malocclusions. Six orthodontist in our department evaluated the treatment results by study models, photographs and radiographs individually and ranking them in order in each group. The average ranking order of each orthodontist was used. Four orthodontist who were not the ones of the 6 orthodontists evaluated the treatment result separately according to Peer Assessment Rating including labial segment alignment, occlusal relationship, overjet, overbite, midline of dentition, the average score was used by weighted processing. The results of the subjective and objective evaluations were compared to identify the consistency of them. Pearson correlation analysis was used to determine the correlation between subjective and objective evaluation. Results The results of the subjective evaluations were highly consistence with the objective evaluate results. 43.6% of the 96 cases, the order of the subjective evaluation and objective evaluation was exactly the same. Subjective and objective evaluations are highly consistent in the top and bottom cases. For the case of the middle segment, the distinction of the subjective evaluation result was higher than that of the objective evaluation result. The measured values of overjet of objective evaluations showed the highest correlation with subjective evaluation, the pearson correlation（r） was 0.583（ P〈0.001）. Conclusion To get the more accurate and reasonable evaluation results, the combination of subjective evaluations and objective evaluations should be used in the evaluation of result of orthodontic treatments.
作者
操亚波
傅露
谷子芽
林新平
CAO Yabo, FU Lu, GU Ziya, et al.(Hangzhou Stomatology Hospital, Zhejiang 310013, Chin)
出处
《浙江创伤外科》
2018年第1期14-17,共4页
Zhejiang Journal of Traumatic Surgery
基金
杭州市科技发展计划项目编号:20130633B35
关键词
正畸
疗效
主观评价
客观评价
Orthodontics
Treatmentoutcome
Subjective evaluation
Objective evaluation
