Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Oral Health 1/2023

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Research

Factors influencing treatment outcomes assessed by the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System (ABO-OGS)

Authors: Tanyapak Kongboonvijit, Sirichom Satrawaha, Anupap Somboonsavatdee

Published in: BMC Oral Health | Issue 1/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Treatment outcomes can be influenced by various factors. This study aimed to determine the association between predisposing patient- and treatment-related factors (demographic, cephalometric parameters, skeletal relationships, Discrepancy Index (DI), extractions, treatment type and duration) and treatment outcomes measures according to the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System index (ABO-OGS).

Methods

Completed cases (N = 100) were included in this cross-sectional study. One calibrated examiner assessed DI, pretreatment lateral cephalometric parameters and ABO-OGS. Patient data, including sex, age, types of malocclusion, extractions, treatment type, and duration, were also collected. Intraexaminer reliability for each measurement was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficients. Multiple linear regression analysis, using the backward elimination method with a significance level (α) of 0.05, was used to determine which factors significantly influenced the ABO-OGS score.

Results

From the study, the overall mean ABO-OGS score was 11.36 points. Factors influencing the ABO-OGS score were pretreatment Wits values (p value = .000), L1-NB (°) (p value = .023) and treatment duration (p value = .019). Subjects with lower negative values of Wits and L1-NB (°) tended to have higher ABO-OGS scores. Additionally, the ABO-OGS score tended to be higher for subjects with longer treatment times.

Conclusions

The majority of treated subjects had satisfactory orthodontic treatment outcomes assessed by the ABO-OGS. The pretreatment severity of skeletal discrepancies determined by the Wits parameter, the degree of retroclined lower incisors and longer treatment duration negatively impacted the treatment outcomes.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Casko JS, Vaden JL, Kokich VG, Damone J, James RD, Cangialosi TJ, et al. Objective grading system for dental casts and panoramic radiographs. American Board of Orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1998;114(5):589–99.CrossRef Casko JS, Vaden JL, Kokich VG, Damone J, James RD, Cangialosi TJ, et al. Objective grading system for dental casts and panoramic radiographs. American Board of Orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1998;114(5):589–99.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Lieber WS, Carlson SK, Baumrind S, Poulton DR. Clinical use of the ABO-scoring index: reliability and subtraction frequency. Angle Orthod. 2003;73(5):556–64.PubMed Lieber WS, Carlson SK, Baumrind S, Poulton DR. Clinical use of the ABO-scoring index: reliability and subtraction frequency. Angle Orthod. 2003;73(5):556–64.PubMed
3.
go back to reference Cansunar HA, Uysal T. Relationship between pretreatment case complexity and orthodontic clinical outcomes determined by the American Board of Orthodontics criteria. Angle Orthod. 2014;84(6):974–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Cansunar HA, Uysal T. Relationship between pretreatment case complexity and orthodontic clinical outcomes determined by the American Board of Orthodontics criteria. Angle Orthod. 2014;84(6):974–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Santiago JJ, Martinez CJ. Use of the objective grading system of the American Board of Orthodontics to evaluate treatment outcomes at the orthodontic graduate program clinic, University of Puerto Rico, 2007-2008. P R Health Sci J. 2012;31(1):29–34.PubMed Santiago JJ, Martinez CJ. Use of the objective grading system of the American Board of Orthodontics to evaluate treatment outcomes at the orthodontic graduate program clinic, University of Puerto Rico, 2007-2008. P R Health Sci J. 2012;31(1):29–34.PubMed
5.
go back to reference Campbell CL, Roberts WE, Hartsfield JK Jr, Qi R. Treatment outcomes in a graduate orthodontic clinic for cases defined by the American Board of Orthodontics malocclusion categories. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2007;132(6):822–9.CrossRef Campbell CL, Roberts WE, Hartsfield JK Jr, Qi R. Treatment outcomes in a graduate orthodontic clinic for cases defined by the American Board of Orthodontics malocclusion categories. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2007;132(6):822–9.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Yang-Powers LC, Sadowsky C, Rosenstein S, BeGole EA. Treatment outcome in a graduate orthodontic clinic using the American Board of Orthodontics grading system. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2002;122(5):451–5.CrossRef Yang-Powers LC, Sadowsky C, Rosenstein S, BeGole EA. Treatment outcome in a graduate orthodontic clinic using the American Board of Orthodontics grading system. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2002;122(5):451–5.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Sunanta K, Luppanapornlarp S, Tangjit N, Putongkam P, Boonpratham S. The quality of treatment outcome in the postgraduate orthodontic clinic, Mahidol University using the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System. M Dent J. 2016;36:307–16. Sunanta K, Luppanapornlarp S, Tangjit N, Putongkam P, Boonpratham S. The quality of treatment outcome in the postgraduate orthodontic clinic, Mahidol University using the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System. M Dent J. 2016;36:307–16.
8.
go back to reference Cangialosi TJ, Riolo ML, Owens SE Jr, Dykhouse VJ, Moffitt AH, Grubb JE, et al. The ABO discrepancy index: a measure of case complexity. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2004;125(3):270–8.CrossRef Cangialosi TJ, Riolo ML, Owens SE Jr, Dykhouse VJ, Moffitt AH, Grubb JE, et al. The ABO discrepancy index: a measure of case complexity. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2004;125(3):270–8.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Williams JC, Atack NE, Sandy J, Ireland A. What factors might affect the success of fixed appliance therapy in adolescent subjects? Part 1. Orthod Update. 2013;6(3):82–5.CrossRef Williams JC, Atack NE, Sandy J, Ireland A. What factors might affect the success of fixed appliance therapy in adolescent subjects? Part 1. Orthod Update. 2013;6(3):82–5.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Anthopoulou C, Konstantonis D, Makou M. Treatment outcomes after extraction and nonextraction treatment evaluated with the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2014;146(6):717–23.CrossRef Anthopoulou C, Konstantonis D, Makou M. Treatment outcomes after extraction and nonextraction treatment evaluated with the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2014;146(6):717–23.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Struble BH, Huang GJ. Comparison of prospectively and retrospectively selected American Board of Orthodontics cases. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2010;137(1):6–e1.CrossRef Struble BH, Huang GJ. Comparison of prospectively and retrospectively selected American Board of Orthodontics cases. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2010;137(1):6–e1.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Hsieh T-J, Pinskaya Y, Roberts W. Assessment of orthodontic treatment outcomes: early treatment versus late treatment. Angle Orthod. 2005;75:162–70.PubMed Hsieh T-J, Pinskaya Y, Roberts W. Assessment of orthodontic treatment outcomes: early treatment versus late treatment. Angle Orthod. 2005;75:162–70.PubMed
13.
go back to reference Pinskaya YB, Hsieh TJ, Roberts WE, Hartsfield JK. Comprehensive clinical evaluation as an outcome assessment for a graduate orthodontics program. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2004;126(5):533–43.CrossRef Pinskaya YB, Hsieh TJ, Roberts WE, Hartsfield JK. Comprehensive clinical evaluation as an outcome assessment for a graduate orthodontics program. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2004;126(5):533–43.CrossRef
14.
15.
go back to reference Pulfer RM, Drake CT, Maupome G, Eckert GJ, Roberts WE. The association of malocclusion complexity and orthodontic treatment outcomes. Angle Orthod. 2009;79(3):468–72.CrossRefPubMed Pulfer RM, Drake CT, Maupome G, Eckert GJ, Roberts WE. The association of malocclusion complexity and orthodontic treatment outcomes. Angle Orthod. 2009;79(3):468–72.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang AG. Statistical power analyses using G*power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods. 2009;41(4):1149–60.CrossRefPubMed Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang AG. Statistical power analyses using G*power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods. 2009;41(4):1149–60.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Techalertpaisarn P, Nilsuwankosit S. A comparison of cephalometric measurements between computerized cephalometric analysis and manual method. J Dent Assoc Thai. 2005;4:26–34. Techalertpaisarn P, Nilsuwankosit S. A comparison of cephalometric measurements between computerized cephalometric analysis and manual method. J Dent Assoc Thai. 2005;4:26–34.
18.
go back to reference Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting Intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15(2):155–63.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting Intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15(2):155–63.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
go back to reference Jacobson A. The “Wits” appraisal of jaw disharmony. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1975;67:125–38.CrossRef Jacobson A. The “Wits” appraisal of jaw disharmony. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1975;67:125–38.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Jacobson A. Application of “Wits” appraisal. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1976;70:179–89.CrossRef Jacobson A. Application of “Wits” appraisal. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1976;70:179–89.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Jacobson A. Update on the “Wits” appraisal. Angle Orthod. 1988;58:205–19.PubMed Jacobson A. Update on the “Wits” appraisal. Angle Orthod. 1988;58:205–19.PubMed
22.
go back to reference Nanda RS. Growth changes in skeletal-facial profile and their significance in orthodontic diagnosis. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1971;59:501–13.CrossRef Nanda RS. Growth changes in skeletal-facial profile and their significance in orthodontic diagnosis. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1971;59:501–13.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Hussels W, Nanda RS. Analysis of factors affecting angle ANB. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1984;85:411–23.CrossRef Hussels W, Nanda RS. Analysis of factors affecting angle ANB. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1984;85:411–23.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Birkeland K, Furevik J, Boe OE, Wisth PJ. Evaluation of treatment and posttreatment changes by the PAR index. Eur J Orthod. 1997;19(3):279–88.CrossRefPubMed Birkeland K, Furevik J, Boe OE, Wisth PJ. Evaluation of treatment and posttreatment changes by the PAR index. Eur J Orthod. 1997;19(3):279–88.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Fink DF, Smith RJ. The duration of orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1992;102:45–51.CrossRef Fink DF, Smith RJ. The duration of orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1992;102:45–51.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference McGuinness NJ, McDonald JP. The influence of operator changes on orthodontic treatment times and results in a postgraduate teaching environment. Eur J Orthod. 1998;20:159–67.CrossRefPubMed McGuinness NJ, McDonald JP. The influence of operator changes on orthodontic treatment times and results in a postgraduate teaching environment. Eur J Orthod. 1998;20:159–67.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Papageorgiou SN, Höchli D, Eliades T. Outcomes of comprehensive fixed appliance orthodontic treatment: a systematic review with meta-analysis and methodological overview. Korean J Orthod. 2017;47(6):401–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Papageorgiou SN, Höchli D, Eliades T. Outcomes of comprehensive fixed appliance orthodontic treatment: a systematic review with meta-analysis and methodological overview. Korean J Orthod. 2017;47(6):401–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
go back to reference Graf I, Bock NC, Bartzela T, et al. Quality of orthodontic care-a multicenter cohort study in Germany : part 1: evaluation of effectiveness of orthodontic treatments and predictive factors. J Orofac Orthop. 2022;83(5):291–306.CrossRefPubMed Graf I, Bock NC, Bartzela T, et al. Quality of orthodontic care-a multicenter cohort study in Germany : part 1: evaluation of effectiveness of orthodontic treatments and predictive factors. J Orofac Orthop. 2022;83(5):291–306.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Factors influencing treatment outcomes assessed by the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System (ABO-OGS)
Authors
Tanyapak Kongboonvijit
Sirichom Satrawaha
Anupap Somboonsavatdee
Publication date
01-12-2023
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Oral Health / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6831
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-03735-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

BMC Oral Health 1/2023 Go to the issue