Targeting, use of appliances, and standards of outcome for General Dental Service orthodontic cases collected between 1990 and 1991 were compared with a sample of cases from an earlier study, collected between 1987 and 1988, using the PAR index and IQTN.
Comparisons are made generally and in relation to the changes in prior approval regulations for cases started since October 1987. More tower-need cases were treated, but there were no more ‘unnecessary’ treatments and there has been a limited improvement in outcomes, as assessed by the indices, associated with increased use of fixed appliances since 1987.
Prior approval appeared to give no tangible benefits in terms of levels of unnecessary treatment or quality of outcome.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
British Dental Association (1995) NHS dentistry—the way forward, Circular letter to members, April 1995.
2.
BrookP. H. and ShawW. C. (1989) The development of an index of orthodontic treatment priority, European Journal of Orthodontics, 11, 309–320.
3.
Dental Practice Board (1994) Dental Data Services.
4.
D.H.S.S. (1984) The Report of the Committee for Enquiry Into Unnecessary Treatment (‘the Schanschieff Report’), H.M.S.O., London.
5.
D.H.S.S. (1987) Report of the Occlusal Index Committee, Report No. 92821/1/48–3, HMSO, London.
6.
EvansR. L. and ShawW. C. (1987) Preliminary evaluation of a scale for rating dental attractiveness. European Journal of Orthodontics, 9, 314–318.
7.
FoxN. A. (1993) The first 100 cases: a personal audit of orthodontic treatment assessed by the PAR index, British Dental Journal, 174, 290–297.
8.
KerrW. J., BuchananI. B. and McCollJ. H. (1993) Use of the PAR index in assessing effectiveness of removable orthodontic appliances, British Journal of Orthodontics, 20, 351–357.
9.
O'BrienK. D. (1991) The effectiveness of orthodontic treatment provided by the salaried orthodontic services, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Manchester.
10.
O'BrienK. D., ShawW. C. and RobertsC. T. (1993) The use of occlusal indices in assessing the provision of orthodontic treatment by the hospital orthodontic service of England and Wales, British Journal of Orthodontics, 20, 25–35.
11.
RichmondS. (1990) A critical evaluation of orthodontic treatment undertaken in the General Dental Services in England and Wales, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Manchester.
12.
RichmondS. (1993a) Personal audit in orthodontics, British Journal of Orthodontics, 20, 131–140.
13.
RichmondS. (1993b) Orthodontic treatment standards in Norway, European Journal of Orthodontics, 15, 7–15.
14.
RichmondS., ShawW. C., O'BrienK. D., BuchananI. B., JonesR., StephensC. D., RobertsC. T. and AndrewsM. (1992a) The development and reliability of the PAR Index: reliability and validity, European Journal of Orthodontics, 14, 125–139.
15.
RichmondS., ShawW. C., RobertsC. T. and AndrewsM. (1992b) The PAR index (Peer Assessment Rating): methods to determine outcome of orthodontic treatment in terms of improvements and standards, European Journal of Orthodontics, b180–187.
16.
RichmondS., ShawW. C., StephensC. D., WebbW. G., RobertsC. T. and AndrewsM. (1993a) Orthodontics in the General Dental Service of England and Wales: a critical assessment of standards, British Dental Journal, 174, 315–327.
17.
RichmondS., TurbillE. A. and AndrewsM. (1993b) Calibration of non-dental and dental personnel in the use of the PAR index, British Journal of Orthodontics, 20, 231–234.
18.
RichmondS., RobertsC. T. and AndrewsM. (1994) Use of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN) in assessing the need for orthodontic treatment, British Journal of Orthodontics, 21, 175–184.
19.
ShawW. C., RichmondS. and O'BrienK. D. (1991) Indices of orthodontic treatment need and treatment standards, British Dental Journal, 170, 107–110.
