Validity of the American Board of Orthodontics Discrepancy Index and the Peer Assessment Rating Index for comprehensive evaluation of malocclusion severity.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the validity of the American Board of Orthodontics Discrepancy Index (ABO-DI) and Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Index in evaluating malocclusion severity in Chinese orthodontic patients.

SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: A stratified random sample of 120 orthodontic patients based on Angle classification was collected from six university orthodontic centres.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-nine orthodontists rated malocclusion severity on a five-point scale by assessing a full set of pre-treatment records for each case and listed reasons for their decision. Their judgement was then compared with ABO-DI and PAR scores determined by three calibrated examiners.

RESULTS: Excellent interexaminer reliability of clinician judgement, ABO-DI and PAR index was demonstrated by the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (rho= 0.995, 0.990 and 0.964, respectively). Both the ABO-DI and US-PAR index showed good correlation with clinician judgement (r=.700 and r=.707, respectively). There was variability among the different Angle classifications: the ABO-DI showed the highest correlation with clinician judgement in Class II patients (r=.780), whereas the US-PAR index showed the highest correlation with clinician judgement in Class III patients (r=.710). Both indices demonstrated the lowest correlations with clinician judgement in Class I patients.

CONCLUSION: With strong interexaminer agreement, the panel consensus was used for validating the ABO-DI and US-PAR index for malocclusion severity. Overall, the ABO-DI and US-PAR index were reliable for measuring malocclusion severity with significantly variable weightings for different Angle classifications. Further modification of the indices for different Angle classification may be indicated.