Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name: 80224.pdf
Format: PDF
Description: publisher's version
Embargo: until further notice
Title: Index of Complexity, Outcome and Need scored on plaster and digital models.
Author(s): Veenema, A.C.; Katsaros, C. ; Boxum, S.C.; Bronkhorst, E.M.; Kuijpers-Jagtman, A.M.
Publication year: 2009
Source: European Journal of Orthodontics, vol. 31, iss. 3, (2009), pp. 281-286
ISSN: 0141-5387
Publication type: Article / Letter to editor

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item : http://repository.ubn.ru.nl/handle/2066/80224   http://repository.ubn.ru.nl/handle/2066/80224

Display more details
Subject: NCEBP 2: Evaluation of complex medical interventions
NCEBP 7: Effective primary care and public health
Organization: Preventative Restorative Dentistry
Dentistry
UMCN Extern
Journal title: European Journal of Orthodontics
Volume: vol. 31
Issue: iss. 3
Page start: p. 281
Page end: p. 286
Abstract:
The aim of this study was to compare standard plaster models with their digital counterparts for the applicability of the Index of Complexity, Outcome, and Need (ICON). Generated study models of 30 randomly selected patients: 30 pre- (T(0)) and 30 post- (T(1)) treatment. Two examiners, calibrated in the ICON, scored the digital and plaster models. The overall ICON scores were evaluated for reliability and reproducibility using kappa statistics and reliability coefficients. The values for reliability of the total and weighted ICON scores were generally high for the T(0) sample (range 0.83-0.95) but less high for the T(1) sample (range 0.55-0.85). Differences in total ICON score between plaster and digital models resulted in mostly statistically insignificant values (P values ranging from 0.07 to 0.19), except for observer 1 in the T(1) sample. No statistically different values were found for the total ICON score on either plaster or digital models. ICON scores performed on computer-based models appear to be as accurate and reliable as ICON scores on plaster models.

Browse

Statistics