Development and validation of the Maxillary Canine Aesthetic Index

5Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Aesthetic appraisal is rarely included in the objective assessment of outcome studies of impacted maxillary canines treatment. The present study aimed to validate a new index for assessing the aesthetic appearance of maxillary canines and adjacent soft tissues. The Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery at University Hospitals Leuven. Four oral-maxillofacial surgeons, two orthodontists, two prosthodontists, and two lay persons rated 11 maxillary canines and adjacent soft tissues according to the new index. Each of the examiners repeated the examination three times with a 2-week interval. Twelve relevant aesthetic variables were selected on the basis of the anatomic form, color, and surface characteristics of the canine crown and on the basis of the anatomic form, color, and surface characteristics of the adjacent soft tissues. Intraclass correlation (ICC) coefficient and Fleiss' kappa statistics were performed to analyze the intrarater and interrater agreement. The index proofed to be a reliable assessment tool. Considering the cumulative assessment of the Maxillary Canine Aesthetic Index (MCAI), the mean ICC value for the interrater agreement of the 10 examiners was 0.71, representing a good agreement. Intrarater agreement ranged from 0.10 to 0.91. Interrater agreement (Fleiss' kappa statistics) calculated for each variable ranged from 0.08 to 0.98. The MCAI is a tool in rating aesthetic outcome of impacted canine treatment and adjacent soft tissues. The MCAI can be used to evaluate the aesthetic outcome after surgical exposure or transalveolar transplantation of maxillary canines.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Grisar, K., Claeys, G., Raes, M., Albdour, E. A., Willems, G., Politis, C., & Jacobs, R. (2018). Development and validation of the Maxillary Canine Aesthetic Index. Clinical and Experimental Dental Research, 4(5), 216–223. https://doi.org/10.1002/cre2.133

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free