Dataset Information

Evaluation of the Reliability, Reproducibility and Validity of Digital Orthodontic Measurements Based on Various Digital Models among Young Patients.

ABSTRACT: The advantages of intraoral model scanning have yielded recent developments. However, few studies have explored the orthodontic clinical use of this technique particularly among young patients. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability, reproducibility and validity of the orthodontic measurements: tooth width, arch length and arch length discrepancy in each digital model obtained by model scanner and intraoral scanner, relative to a plaster model. Arch length measured using two methods: curved arch length (CAL) measured automatically by digital program and sum of sectional liner arch length (SLAL) measured sum of anterior and posterior liner arch lengths. Arch length discrepancy calculated each arch length measurement methods: curved arch length discrepancy (CALD) and sum of sectional liner arch length discrepancy (SLALD). Forty young patients were eligible for the study. A plaster model (P), model-scanned digital model (MSD) and intraoral scanned digital model (ISD) were acquired from each patient. The reliability of the measurements was evaluated using Pearson's correlation coefficient, while the reproducibility was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient. The validity was assessed by a paired t-test. All measurements measured in P, MSD and ISD exhibited good reliability and reproducibility. Most orthodontic measurements despite of CAL in MSD exhibited high validity. Only the SLAL and SLALD in ISD group differed significantly, despite the good validity of the tooth width, CAL and CALD. The measurements based on the digital program appeared high reliability, reproducibility and accurate than conventional measurement. However, SLAL and SLALD in ISD group appeared shorter because of distortion during intraoral scanning. However, this could be compensated by using digital programed curved arch. Although the validity of SLAL and SLALD in the ISD group differed statistically, the difference is not considered clinically significant. Although MSD and ISD are acceptable for a clinical space analysis, clinicians should be aware of digital model-induced errors.

SUBMITTER: Park SH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7564383 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evaluation of the Reliability, Reproducibility and Validity of Digital Orthodontic Measurements Based on Various Digital Models among Young Patients.

Park Seo-Hyun SH Byun Soo-Hwan SH Oh So-Hee SH Lee Hye-Lim HL Kim Ju-Won JW Yang Byoung-Eun BE Park In-Young IY

Journal of clinical medicine 20200824 9

The advantages of intraoral model scanning have yielded recent developments. However, few studies have explored the orthodontic clinical use of this technique particularly among young patients. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability, reproducibility and validity of the orthodontic measurements: tooth width, arch length and arch length discrepancy in each digital model obtained by model scanner and intraoral scanner, relative to a plaster model. Arch length measured using two methods: curve ...[more]

PMID: 32846984

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Ruff Figural Fluency Test (RFFT) is a valid but time-consuming and labour-intensive cognitive paper-and-pencil test. A digital RFFT was developed that can be conducted independently using an iPad and Apple Pencil and RFFT scores are computed automatically. We investigated the validity and reliability of this digital RFFT.MethodsWe randomly allocated participants to the digital or paper-and-pencil RFFT. After the first test, the other test was performed immediately (cross-over). Participants were invited for a second digital RFFT 1 week later. For the digital RFFT, an (automatic) algorithm and two independent raters (criterion standard) assessed the number of unique designs (UD) and perseverative errors (PE). These raters also assessed the paper-and-pencil RFFT. We used Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), sensitivity, specificity, %-agreement, Kappa, and Bland-Altman plots.ResultsWe included 94 participants (mean (SD) age 39.9 (14.8), 73.4% follow-up). Mean (SD) UD and median (IQR) PE of the digital RFFT were 84.2 (26.0) and 4 (2-7.3), respectively. Agreement between manual and automatic scoring of the digital RFFT was high for UD (ICC = 0.99, 95% CI 0.98, 0.99, sensitivity = 0.98; specificity = 0.96) and PE (ICC = 0.99, 95% CI 0.98, 0.99; sensitivity = 0.90, specificity = 1.00), indicating excellent criterion validity. Small but significant differences in UD were found between the automatic and manual scoring (mean difference: - 1.12, 95% CI - 1.92, - 0.33). Digital and paper-and-pencil RFFT had moderate agreement for UD (ICC = 0.73, 95% CI 0.34, 0.87) and poor agreement for PE (ICC = 0.47, 95% CI 0.30, 0.62). Participants had fewer UD on the digital than paper-and-pencil RFFT (mean difference: - 7.09, 95% CI - 11.80, - 2.38). The number of UD on the digital RFFT was associated with higher education (Spearman's r = 0.43, p < 0.001), and younger age (Pearson's r = - 0.36, p < 0.001), showing its ability to discriminate between different age categories and levels of education. Test-retest reliability was moderate (ICC = 0.74, 95% CI 0.61, 0.83).ConclusionsThe automatic scoring of the digital RFFT has good criterion and convergent validity. There was low agreement between the digital RFFT and paper-and-pencil RFFT and moderate test-retest reliability, which can be explained by learning effects. The digital RFFT is a valid and reliable instrument to measure executive cognitive function among the general population and is a feasible alternative to the paper-and-pencil RFFT in large-scale studies. However, its scores cannot be used interchangeably with the paper-and-pencil RFFT scores.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Manufacturers of orthodontic aligners suggest that users remove appliances every time they consume solid foods or any drink (except water). This is to avoid a color change within the clear thermoplastic material of which they are made. However, limited quantitative evidence exists to guide users and practitioners in this regard. Herein, we evaluated the color stability of the polymer forming three different American brands of aligners and the stain-removal potential of two cleansers to provide such guidelines. METHODS:The removable appliances (300 specimens, 100 per brand) were exposed to different staining agents common in a regular diet (coffee, black tea, red wine, cola) or to a control solution in vitro over 12 h or 7 days. The three brands evaluated were Invisalign®, ClearCorrect® and Minor Tooth Movement®. These were then cleaned by using either Invisalign® cleaning crystals or the Cordless Sonic Cleaner combined with a Retainer Brite® tablet. The CIELAB color space approach was used to compare color changes (ΔE) in aligners before immersion (T0), after a 12-h exposure (T1), after a 7-day exposure (T2) and after cleaning (T3). Statistical methods (Levene's test, ANOVA, Brunner-Langer model, Tukey's range test and t-test) were used to identify interactions between the brands themselves or between the brands and the cleaning methods. Statistical analyses were performed at the .05 significance level. RESULTS:A 12-h or 7-day exposure to instant coffee or red wine significantly colored the Invisalign® aligners compared to the two other brands. Black tea created an important extrinsic color change for all three brands after 7 days. Clinically, both cleaning methods showed a better efficacy in removing stains from black tea compared to other staining agents. CONCLUSIONS:The Invisalign® aligners were more prone to pigmentation than the ClearCorrect® or the Minor Tooth Movement® devices after an exposure to coffee or red wine. Black tea caused important stains on the surface of the three tested brands. Both cleansing methods performed similarly.

Project description:ObjectiveTo adapt the Appropriateness Evaluation Protocol (AEP) to the specific settings of health care in China and to validate the Chinese version AEP (C-AEP).MethodsForward and backward translations were carried out to the original criteria. Twenty experts participated in the consultancy to form a preliminary version of the C-AEP. To ensure applicability, tests of reliability and validity were performed on 350 admissions and 3,226 hospital days of acute myocardial infraction patients and total hip replacement patients in two tertiary hospitals by two C-AEP reviewers and two physician reviewers. Overall agreement, specific agreement, and Cohen's Kappa were calculated to compare the concordance of decisions between pairs of reviewers to test inter-rater reliability and convergent validity. The use of "overrides" and opinions of experts were recorded as measurements of content validity. Face validity was tested through collecting perspectives of nonprofessionals. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were also reported.ResultsThere are 14 admission and 24 days of care criteria in the initial version of C-AEP. Kappa coefficients indicate substantial agreement between reviewers: with regard to inter-rater reliability, Kappa (?) coefficients are 0.746 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.644-0.834) and 0.743 (95% CI 0.698-0.767) of admission and hospital days, respectively; for convergent validity, the ? statistics are 0.678 (95% CI 0.567-0.778) and 0.691 (95% CI 0.644-0.717), respectively. Overrides account for less than 2% of all judgments. Content validity and face validity were confirmed by experts and nonprofessionals, respectively. According to the C-AEP reviewers, 18.3% of admissions and 28.5% of inpatient days were deemed inappropriate.ConclusionsThe C-AEP is a reliable and valid screening tool in China's tertiary hospitals. The prevalence of inappropriateness is substantial in our research. To reduce inappropriate utilization, further investigation is needed to elucidate the reasons and risk factors for this inappropriateness.

Dataset Information

Evaluation of the Reliability, Reproducibility and Validity of Digital Orthodontic Measurements Based on Various Digital Models among Young Patients.

Publications

Evaluation of the Reliability, Reproducibility and Validity of Digital Orthodontic Measurements Based on Various Digital Models among Young Patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets