Introduction: This study was designed to compare the reliability of the Q-sort and visual analog scale (VAS) methods for the assessment of smile esthetics. Furthermore, agreement between orthodontists and parents of orthodontic patients, and between male and female raters, was assessed in terms of subjective evaluation of the smile. Methods: Clinical photographs and digital video captures of 48 orthodontically treated patients were rated by 2 panels: 25 experienced orthodontists (15 men, 10 women) and 20 parents of the patients (8 men, 12 women). Interrater reliability of the Q-sort and VAS methods was evaluated by using single-measure and average-measure intraclass correlation (ICC). Kappa agreement and the McNemar test were used to evaluate agreement between orthodontists and parents, and between men and women, for "attractive" and "unattractive" images of smiles captured with clinical photography. Results: The single-measure ICC coefficients showed fair to good reliability of the Q-sort and poor reliability of the VAS for measuring esthetic preferences of an individual orthodontist or parent. Both rating groups agreed significantly (P >0.05) on the total percentage of "attractive" images of smiles captured with clinical photography. Men and women, however, significantly disagreed on the total percentages of "attractive" and "unattractive" smiles. Women rated higher percentages of both image groups as "attractive" than did their male counterparts. Conclusions: The Q-sort was more reliable than the VAS for measuring smile esthetics. Orthodontists and parents of orthodontic patients agreed with respect to "attractive" and "unattractive" smiles. Men and women agreed poorly with respect to "attractive" and "unattractive" smiles.

Q-sort assessment vs visual analog scale in the evaluation of smile esthetics / B. J. Schabel;J. A. McNamara;L. Franchi;T. Baccetti. - In: AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS. - ISSN 0889-5406. - STAMPA. - 135(2009), pp. S61-S71. [10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.08.019]

Q-sort assessment vs visual analog scale in the evaluation of smile esthetics

FRANCHI, LORENZO;BACCETTI, TIZIANO
2009

Abstract

Introduction: This study was designed to compare the reliability of the Q-sort and visual analog scale (VAS) methods for the assessment of smile esthetics. Furthermore, agreement between orthodontists and parents of orthodontic patients, and between male and female raters, was assessed in terms of subjective evaluation of the smile. Methods: Clinical photographs and digital video captures of 48 orthodontically treated patients were rated by 2 panels: 25 experienced orthodontists (15 men, 10 women) and 20 parents of the patients (8 men, 12 women). Interrater reliability of the Q-sort and VAS methods was evaluated by using single-measure and average-measure intraclass correlation (ICC). Kappa agreement and the McNemar test were used to evaluate agreement between orthodontists and parents, and between men and women, for "attractive" and "unattractive" images of smiles captured with clinical photography. Results: The single-measure ICC coefficients showed fair to good reliability of the Q-sort and poor reliability of the VAS for measuring esthetic preferences of an individual orthodontist or parent. Both rating groups agreed significantly (P >0.05) on the total percentage of "attractive" images of smiles captured with clinical photography. Men and women, however, significantly disagreed on the total percentages of "attractive" and "unattractive" smiles. Women rated higher percentages of both image groups as "attractive" than did their male counterparts. Conclusions: The Q-sort was more reliable than the VAS for measuring smile esthetics. Orthodontists and parents of orthodontic patients agreed with respect to "attractive" and "unattractive" smiles. Men and women agreed poorly with respect to "attractive" and "unattractive" smiles.
135
S61
S71
B. J. Schabel;J. A. McNamara;L. Franchi;T. Baccetti
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
1-s2.0-S0889540608012924-main.pdf

Accesso chiuso

Tipologia: Pdf editoriale (Version of record)
Licenza: DRM non definito
Dimensione 158.11 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
158.11 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in FLORE sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/2158/361094
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 52
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 49
social impact