Premium
Evaluation of the Relationship between Subjects’ Perception and Professional Assessment of Esthetic Treatment Needs
Author(s) -
Tortopidis Dimitrios,
Hatzikyriakos Andreas,
Kokoti Maria,
Menexes George,
Tsiggos Nikolaos
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.919
H-Index - 60
eISSN - 1708-8240
pISSN - 1496-4155
DOI - 10.1111/j.1708-8240.2007.00089.x
Subject(s) - cronbach's alpha , reliability (semiconductor) , scale (ratio) , psychology , construct validity , perception , factorial analysis , clinical psychology , dentistry , medicine , psychometrics , mathematics , statistics , quantum mechanics , power (physics) , physics , neuroscience
Purpose: The purposes of the present study were to (1) evaluate the esthetic dental treatment need by means of two special questionnaires, (2) determine the reliability and the construct validity of the measurement scales derived from these questionnaires, and (3) investigate the relationship between Greek subjects’ perception and a professional examiner’s assessment regarding the esthetic treatment need. Materials and Methods: Participants in this survey consisted of 132 subjects (48 males with mean age 39.0 ± 14.5 years old, 84 females with mean age 41.7 ± 14.5 years old) with natural teeth and fixed restorations. Subjects were asked to complete a special self‐evaluation questionnaire consisting of 12 items. During the next stage, all participants were clinically examined by an experienced examiner and the data collected were used to fill out a second special professional assessment questionnaire consisting of 20 items. The forms structure used were in accordance with well‐established indices used in orthodontics for assessing esthetic treatment need. Results: The reliability of the multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) analysis‐derived scales was very satisfactory (Cronbach’s a coefficient: a =0.82) for the total scale of the self‐evaluation measurement. For the professional assessment scale, the reliability of the total scale was almost perfect (a=0.92). The MCA revealed one reliable factorial construct for the self‐evaluation measurement scale and two reliable constructs for the professional measurement scale. Pearson’s correlation coefficient indicated a very low agreement between self‐evaluation and professional measurement scales. Conclusion: The findings of this survey suggest that there was a relative disagreement between subjects’ perception and professional assessment regarding the need for esthetic dental treatment. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE In the present survey, the agreement between subjects’ perception and clinical assessment of esthetic dental treatment need was found to be very low, which highlighted the discrepancies between patients’ and dentists’ perceptions of esthetic needs.