posted on 2017-01-30, 00:00authored byKristina Dragstrem, Maria Therese S. Galang-Boquiren, Ales Obrez, Maria Grace Costa Viana, John E. Grubb, Budi Kusnoto
A digital analysis that is shown to be accurate will ease demonstration
of initial case complexity. To date no literature exists on the accuracy of digital American
Board of Orthodontics Discrepancy Index (DI) calculations when applied to pretreatment
digital models. METHODS: Plaster models were obtained from 45 previous patients with
varying degrees of malocclusion. Total Discrepancy Index score and its target disorders
were computed manually with a periodontal probe on original plaster casts (gold
standard) and digitally using Ortho Insight 3D (Motion View Software, Hixson, TN) and
OrthoCad (Cadent, Carlstadt, NJ). Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability was assessed for
15 subjects using Spearman’s Rho correlation test. Accuracy of DI scores and target
disorders were assessed for all 45 subjects using Wilcoxon signed ranks test. RESULTS:
Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability was high for total DI score and most target
disorders (r>0.8). No significant difference was found between total DI score when
measured with OrthoCad compared to manual calculation. Total DI score calculated by
Ortho Insight 3D was found to be significantly larger than manual calculation by 2.71
points. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that a discrepancy index calculated by
MotionView Ortho InSisght 3D may lead the clinician to overestimate case complexity.
OrthoCad’s discrepancy index module demonstrated to be a clinically acceptable
alternative to manual calculation of total score.