Correlation between adolescent orthodontic quality of life and ABO Discrepancy Index in an orthodontic treatment-seeking population: A cross-sectional study

Objective: To evaluate the association between adolescents’ orthodontic quality of life before initiating orthodontic treatment and their objective case complexity as measured by the American Board of Orthodontics’ Discrepancy Index (DI). Design and setting: A single-centre, cross-sectional survey study. Methods: The Orthodontic Quality of Life Assessment Survey (OQoLAS) was administered to 240 adolescents (aged 11–14 years) during their record-gathering appointment. After completion of the survey, a DI score was calculated for each patient based on pretreatment measurements. Pearson correlation coefficients, r, were used to assess the association of DI scores with OQoLAS total and subdomain scores. A multiple linear regression of OQoLAS total scores adjusting for age, gender and DI scores was conducted. Results: The study did not find a strong correlation between OQoLAS and DI scores (r = 0.10; P = 0.6497). On average, the OQoLAS scores (functional, emotional and social subdomains of OQoLAS) were slightly higher among girls than among boys but there was no statistical difference for total OQoLAS score between boys and girls (42.4 vs. 45.4, P = 0.2005). However, there was a significant difference in oral health perception rating between boys and girls, with girls being more likely to rate their oral health positively (adjusted P = 0.0226). The total DI scores of boys with respect to girls were not statistically different ( P = 0.4256). The components of the DI that showed highest score were for cephalometric measures, followed by overjet; and the lowest scores were for lateral open bite and buccal posterior crossbite. The measure of association analysis did not show any strong correlation between the OQoLAS (total score and subdomain scores), and DI score or any of its components. Conclusion: Malocclusion severity was not found to be correlated with orthodontic quality of life in adolescents aged 11–14 years seeking orthodontic treatment.

Relationship between the Dental Aesthetic Index and Discrepancy Index

Objective: To establish the association between malocclusion severity and orthodontic case complexity as assessed by the Dental Aesthetic Index (DAI) and the American Board of Orthodontics Discrepancy Index (ABO-DI), respectively. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Pre-treatment dental casts and radiographs from 500 individuals (294 women and 206 men; mean age = 26.06 ± 11.58 years) were randomly selected from the orthodontics department of a private university. Methods: Malocclusion severity was assessed using DAI and case complexity was evaluated with ABO-DI. Three previously calibrated operators performed the measurements. Spearman’s correlation analysis, Mann–Whitney U test, Kruskal–Wallis test and a linear generalised model were used for statistical evaluation ( P < 0.05 was considered significant). Results: Although the correlation (r = 0.45; P < 0.0001) between malocclusion severity and case complexity was moderate, strong evidence of an association ( P < 0.001) between dichotomised DAI and ABO-DI total scores was observed. The linear generalised model showed that for each point of increase in DAI score, the ABO-DI score increased an average of 0.3624 points ( P < 0.0001). Conclusion: An association between malocclusion severity and case complexity is suggested. A linear generalised model could be used to predict the complexity of the case from the malocclusion severity (DAI score).

Formulating a New Orthodontic Index: An Indian Board of Orthodontics Initiative

A proposal to formulate an orthodontic index specific for the Indian Board of Orthodontics (IBO) to determine the acceptability and degree of difficulty of a cases submitted for the phase III examination was discussed at the College of Diplomates meet (CDIBO). To ascertain the degree of difficulty of a case is very subjective; therefore, the need to quantify the complexity of a case in a standard format is required. To develop a Discrepancy Index for the IBO, 20 Dental and Cephalometric components of a malocclusion and 20 intraoral frontal photographs would have to be evaluated and a weightage score for each component would be assigned. Components such as upper and lower anterior proclination, commonly seen in our Asian population which have been omitted in the commonly used indices such as PAR (Peer Assessment Review) IOTN (Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need) and the ICON (Index of Complexity,Outcome and Need) have been included. The proposed IBO Index would add uniformity and standardization in assessing the degree of difficulty and also the degree of improvement of a case, which would be a beneficial tool for a fair evaluation.

The Use of Financial Graphics as an Impression Management Tool

The main objective of this chapter is to determine the graph discrepancy index and to analyze which factors can actually influence the graphical discrepancy index, based on the strategies of impression management. For this particular purpose, a content analysis of management and financial reports was made, from 2010 to 2015, of Portuguese companies with securities admitted to trading in Euronext Lisbon. Findings indicate that companies tend to engage in printing management practices, but it was not possible to identify the determinants of such practices since all the hypotheses were rejected.

Assessment of clinical cases using ABO discrepancy index

Introduction: The American Board of Orthodontics objectively quantifies the complexity of malocclusion before orthodontic treatment. This study aims to assess the complexity of cases as measured by ABO discrepancy index (DI) in the patients under treatment by the orthodontics residents of Kantipur Dental College (KDC). Additional objectives were to 1) Ascertain DI relative to sex, age and race/ethnicity, and 2) Differential analysis of the components of the DI. Materials & Method: DI was determined for 220 consecutive cases started by orthodontic residents of KDC in a three-year graduate orthodontics program from 2014-2018. The DI was scored and compared with the patient’s sex and age. Result: The DI is not statistically significant to age, sex and race/ ethnicity. The mean DI score (± SD) was 18.65 (±10.521). Differential analysis of the components of the DI showed that the highest scores were for cephalometric measures, followed by overjet, crowding, occlusion, and the lowest scores were for lingual posterior crossbite. Conclusion: The DI was a relatively reliable index for measuring malocclusion severity. It is independent of patient’s age and race/ethnicity but is dependent on sex. Area of possible future improvements includes malocclusion sub-categories (Class II div. 1 and 2), and scores for bony and soft tissue impactions.