Gottlieb developed a simple grading scheme for evaluating the outcome following orthodontic therapy. The author is from Boulder, Colorado.
Criteria for orthodontic correction:
(1) Class I molar relationship
(2) Class I cuspid relationship
(3) cusp interdigitation
(4) overbite
(5) overjet
(6) midline
(7) rotation
(8) crowding or spacing
(9) arch form
(10) torque and parallelism
Initial Status |
Points |
not a problem |
0 |
problem |
5 |
total initial score =
= SUM(points for all 10 criteria)
After the orthodontic treatment, the patient is assessed once more, evaluating those items that were a problem in the initial evaluation. (There could be an argument to do all of the criteria, since a treatment could introduce problems).
Post-Treatment Status |
Points |
condition corrected |
5 |
condition almost corrected |
3 |
condition half corrected |
1 |
condition not corrected |
0 |
condition worsened |
-1 |
post-treatment score =
= SUM(points for status of problems after treatment)
Interpretation:
• minimum initial score: 0 (in which case no orthodontic care would be given)
• maximum initial score: 50
• minimum post-treatment score: -10
• maximum post-treatment score: 50
• The maximum post-treatment score for a patient equals the initial score for the patient.
outcome percent =
= (post-treatment score) / (initial score) * 100%
Outcome Percent |
Adequacy of Care |
>= 85% |
good |
75 – 84.9% |
satisfactory |
65 – 74.9% |
mediocre |
50 – 64.9% |
poor |
< 50% |
unsatisfactory |
where:
• The original table had overlaps at 65%, 75% and 85%.
• I would imagine that a score > 95% would be considered an excellent outcome.
Specialty: Otolaryngology
ICD-10: ,