A comparison and evaluation of the use of three orthodontic indices in assessing the treatment outcome
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/aos.v85.46998Keywords:
IOTN, ICON, PAR, orthodontic treatment, occlusal indices, treatment outcomeAbstract
Objective: To assess the differences in treatment outcome evaluation using the Dental Health Component (DHC) and Aesthetic Component (AC) of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN), the Index of Complexity, Outcome and Need (ICON), and the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR), and to examine scoring agreement between orthodontic residents and undergraduate students.
Material and methods: A total of 87 study casts were assessed using the IOTN, ICON, and PAR indices to evaluate treatment outcome, with intra- and inter-examiner reliability examined.
Results: High to very high correlation was observed among AC, ICON, and PAR at T1 (p < 0.0001), while at T2, a high correlation was found between ICON and AC (p < 0.0001). Low correlations were found between DHC and both PAR and ICON. A negligible correlation was found between AC and DHC at T2. IOTN components showed good reproducibility at T1, whereas DHC, ICON, and PAR demonstrated moderate reliability at T2. Among orthodontic residents, ICON showed moderate (T1) and good (T2) reliability. PAR showed excellent reliability at T1. Among all examiners, all indices had moderate reliability at T1, and both ICON and PAR had poor reliability at T2.
Conclusions: ICON was the most reliable index among orthodontic residents and required less scoring time than PAR, although IOTN remained the quickest to apply.
Downloads
References
Summers CJ. The occlusal index: a system for identifying and scoring occlusal disorders. Am J Orthod. 1971;59(6):552–67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(71)90002-9
Daniels C, Richmond S. The development of the index of complexity, outcome and need (ICON). J Orthod. 2000;27(2):149–62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ortho/27.2.149
Richmond S, O’Brien KD, Buchanan IB, Burden DJ. An introduction to occlusal indices. Manchester: Mandet Press, Victoria University of Manchester; 1992.
Borzabadi-Farahani A. An insight into four orthodontic treatment need indices. Prog Orthod. 2011;12(2):132–42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pio.2011.06.001
Tang EL, Wei SH. Recording and measuring malocclusion: a review of the literature. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1993;103(4):344–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(93)70015-G
Shaw WC, Richmond S, O’Brien KD. The use of occlusal indices: a European perspective. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1995; 107(1):1–10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(95)70151-6
Jacobson A. DAI: the dental aesthetic index. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1987;92(6):521–2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(87)90238-1
Bjoerk A, Krebs A, Solow B. A method for epidemiological registration of malocclusion. Acta Odontol Scand. 1964;22:27–41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/00016356408993963
Ackerman JL, Proffit WR. The characteristics of malocclusion: a modern approach to classification and diagnosis. Am J Orthod. 1969;56(5):443–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(69)90206-1
Ballard CF, Wayman JB. A report on a survey of the orthodontic requirements of 310 army apprentices. Dent Pract Dent Rec. 1965;15:221–6.
Angle E. Classification of malocclusion. Dent Cosmos. 1899;41:248–64.
Hassan R, Rahimah AK. Occlusion, malocclusion and method of measurements – an overview. Arch Orofac Sci. 2007;2:3–9.
Richmond S, Shaw WC, Roberts CT, Andrews M. The PAR index (peer assessment rating): methods to determine outcome of orthodontic treatment in terms of improvement and standards. Eur J Orthod. 1992;14(3):180–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/14.3.180
Borzabadi-Farahani A. Agreement between the index of complexity, outcome, and need and the dental and aesthetic components of the index of orthodontic treatment need. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2011;140(2):233–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.09.028
Järvinen S. Indexes for orthodontic treatment need. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2001;120(3):237–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2001.114830
Brook PH, Shaw WC. The development of an index of orthodontic treatment priority. Eur J Orthod. 1989;11(3):309–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.ejo.a035999
Bergtröm K, Halling A. Comparison of three indices in evaluation of orthodontic treatment outcome. Acta Odontol Scand. 1997;55(1): 36–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/00016359709091939
Richmond S, Shaw WC, O’Brien KD, Buchanan IB, Jones R, Stephens CD, et al. The development of the PAR index (peer assessment rating): reliability and validity. Eur J Orthod. 1992;14(2):125–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/14.2.125
Green JI. An overview of the peer assessment rating (PAR) index for primary dental care practitioners. Prim Dent J. 2016;5(4):28–37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1308/205016816820209460
Louwerse TJ, Aartman IHA, Kramer GJC, Prahl-Andersen B. The reliability and validity of the index of complexity, outcome and need for determining treatment need in Dutch orthodontic practice. Eur J Orthod. 2006;28(1):58–64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cji085
Savastano NJ Jr, Firestone AR, Beck FM, Vig KWL. Validation of the complexity and treatment outcome components of the index of complexity, outcome, and need (ICON). Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2003;124(3):244–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00399-8
Khandakji MN, Ghafari JG. Evaluation of commonly used occlusal indices in determining orthodontic treatment need. Eur J Orthod. 2020;42(1):107–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjz042
McGorray SP, Wheeler TT, Keeling SD, Yurkiewicz L, Taylor MG, King GJ. Evaluation of orthodontists’ perception of treatment need and the peer assessment rating (PAR) index. Angle Orthod. 1999;69(4):325–33.
Firestone AR, Beck FM, Beglin FM, Vig KWL. Evaluation of the peer assessment rating (PAR) index as an index of orthodontic treatment need. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2002;122(5):463–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2002.128465
Cruz López MF, Gutiérrez Rojo MF, Gutiérrez Rojo JF, Rojas García AR. Comparison between the ICON index and the esthetic component of the IOTN to determine the need for orthodontic treatment. Rev Mex Ortod. 2017;5(1):e10–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmo.2017.03.029
Djordjevic J, Scepan I, Glisic B. Evaluation of agreement and correlation of three occlusal indices in an assessment of orthodontic treatment need. Vojnosanit Pregl. 2011;68(2):125–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/VSP1102125D
Fox NA, Daniels C, Gilgrass T. A comparison of the index of complexity outcome and need (ICON) with the peer assessment rating (PAR) and the index of orthodontic treatment need (IOTN). Br Dent J. 2002;193(4):225–30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4801530
Borzabadi-Farahani A. A review of the evidence supporting the aesthetic orthodontic treatment need indices. Prog Orthod. 2012;13(3):304–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pio.2012.03.003
Onyeaso CO, Begole EA. Relationship between index of complexity, outcome and need, dental aesthetic index, peer assessment rating index, and American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2007;131(2):248–52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.04.045
Kaygisiz E, Uzuner FD, Taner L. A comparison of three orthodontic treatment indices with regard to angle classification. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2016;40(2):169–74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17796/1053-4628-40.2.169
Beglin FM, Firestone AR, Vig KWL, Beck FM, Kuthy RA, Wade D. A comparison of the reliability and validity of 3 occlusal indexes of orthodontic treatment need. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2001;120(3):240–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2001.116401
Trivedi K, Shyagali TR, Doshi J, Rajpara Y. Reliability of aesthetic component of IOTN in the assessment of subjective orthodontic treatment need. J Adv Oral Res. 2011;2(1):59–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2229411220110111
Cooper S, Mandall NA, Dibiase D, Shaw WC. The reliability of the index of orthodontic treatment need over time. J Orthod. 2000;27(1):47–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ortho/27.1.47
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Rayed Aldausari, Maryam Al-Zayer, Marie Pegelow
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Acta Odontologica Scandinavica publishes high quality original research papers as well as critical reviews relevant on diseases of the oral cavity, their treatment, epidemiology and associated biomaterials and their development.
