- Research article
- Open Access
- Open Peer Review
Ethnic variations in orthodontic treatment need in London schoolchildren
© Alkhatib et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2005
- Received: 28 June 2005
- Accepted: 27 September 2005
- Published: 27 September 2005
The study was carried out to determine the prevalence of orthodontic treatment need in children from minority ethnic groups and compare the need to the white population. The second objective was to explore variations in agreement between subjective and objective treatment need in a multiethnic context using the aesthetic component of Orthodontic Treatment Need Index (IOTN AC).
A cross-sectional study in North West London, 14 schools were randomly selected from the 27 schools in the two boroughs of Harrow and Hillingdon. Comparison between objective and subjective treatment need was carried out using IOTN AC index. Clinical orthodontic treatment need was also recorded using the dental health component of Orthodontic Treatment Need Index (IOTN DHC).
2,788 children were examined and completed the questionnaire. 16% of the study population were already wearing appliances or had finished orthodontic treatment. Of the remaining children; 15% had definite need for treatment using the dental health component of the IOTN. There was no significant variation in the need for orthodontic treatment between different ethnic backgrounds (P > 0.05) whether using the AC or DHC components of the IOTN index. However, poor agreement was detected between professional and subjective assessment of ethnic minority of orthodontic treatment need using IOTN AC index.
Orthodontic treatment need in children of ethnic minorities does not differ significantly from the vast majority of white children. However treatment need based on aesthetic index continues to vary in all ethnic groups from the professional aesthetic assessment
- Ethnic Minority
- Orthodontic Treatment
- Kappa Score
- Professional Assessment
- Aesthetic Index
Orthodontic treatment is one of the most costly and challenging issues to NHS dentistry. In 2003, fees for orthodontic treatment accounted for more than a quarter of all child fees . Whilst the focus has been often on strategies to improve access and increase budget of orthodontic care, evaluation of the criteria used for defining the need has received little attention. Most orthodontic indices have been primarily based on white populations; this may raise a concern since the demography of the United Kingdom has changed rapidly in the last few decades. The majority of ethnic minorities reside in the England region with London being the most diversified city; almost 30% of London inhabitants are of ethnic minorities .
The health needs of ethnic minorities may be different from the white population. In a comparative review of subgingival calculus formation, association between plaque formation and ethnicity has been reported . These needs may be particularly different when they are related to aesthetics, where confounding factors such as cultural or societal values play a major role in shaping these needs. It has been shown that black people are more likely to have different orthodontic needs than other ethnicities; they are more likely to have class III occlusion, anterior open bites and mid-line diastema than their white or Asian counterparts [4, 5]. Kiyak  showed that Pacific Asians had different dental beliefs and behaviours and different views about aesthetics compared to Caucasians.
Two of the properties of the ideal orthodontic index laid out by Shaw et al  were; 1- sensitive to the needs of the patients, 2- acceptable to both the public and the profession. Orthodontic care in the UK is currently provided on the definite need basis of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN) devised by Brook and Shaw . Under this category only severe cases are eligible for treatment under the scheme. IOTN, however, has two components; the Dental Health Component (DHC) and the Aesthetic Component (AC). The latter has gained increased popularity in recent years because a) the primary motive for seeking orthodontic treatment is improving appearance [9, 10] and an aesthetic component would seem necessary to any diagnostic tool. The aesthetic component should therefore be accounted for when planning treatment using the DHC component, b) since patient satisfaction is the one of the main outcomes of treatment, a tool should be devised to be used by both patients and professionals to measure this outcome; the AC component has been shown to be capable of facilitating this task . Moreover, a strong correlation between the AC component and psychosocial outcomes was reported by Bennett et al . Mandall et al  also reported an association between child self esteem and IOTN AC but not with IOTN DHC. However, the AC is more subjective and less reliable than the DHC; studies which compared the need based on the two components demonstrated poor correlation [13–15]. Researchers suggested adjustment to the DHC defined need in order to balance for the aesthetic component.
The aims of the study were, first to explore the need for treatment in a multiethnic community. Secondly to assess whether the need for orthodontic treatment in ethnic minorities differs from the white population based on the dental health component and on the aesthetic component and, thirdly to test the agreement between normative and perceived need for orthodontic care across all ethnicities.
The study took place 2002/2003. All schools in the boroughs of Harrow and Hillingdon were included in the initial sampling. Fourteen out of the twenty seven schools in the two boroughs were selected using a one to one simple sampling technique. The required sample size for each ethnic group was based on our pilot study . Children aged 12 to14 were included, the study population consisted of 3,500 children. Dental examination was carried out in accordance with BASCD criteria , DMFT was recorded together with IOTN DHC and AC, the examiner (PJ) was calibrated for both DMFT and IOTN indexes with high intra examiner reliability (for the Aesthetic Component of IOTN, the examiner achieved a weighted kappa score of 0.82 showing very good agreement, sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 84.2%). The questionnaire was developed by the Transcultural Oral Health Centre at an earlier stage . This was then modified and tested in a second pilot.
Measurement of IOTN AC was recorded using a 10-point analogue scale with two pictures at each end of the scale representing IOTN AC scores of 1 and 10, this was used to avoid the bias reported by Burden and Pine  in recording children's perception of the IOTN AC. Normative IOTN AC and DHC were recorded according to the calibration criteria. Major ethnic groups in the UK described by the national census were used to identify the ethic background of the child. Ethnicity was therefore categorized as follows:
– White: English, Irish or any other Caucasian white.
– Black: African, Caribbean or black other.
– Asian: Indian, Sri Lankan, Bangladeshi and Pakistani.
– Chinese: Mainland Chinese, Korean, Taiwanese and Japanese.
– Mixed: Any mixed race.
Data was encoded and entered onto SPSS software, descriptive analysis was undertaken to report frequency distributions of IOTN scores. Logistic regression was undertaken to explore the ethnic variation with agreement/disagreement with different IOTN AC threshold levels. Kappa coefficient test was utilized to estimate the agreement between normative and subjective need for treatment.
Ethical approvals were obtained from the local ethic committee in the two boroughs. Consent letters were sent out to schools and parents.
Out of the 3,500 children, 2,788 children were examined and completed the questionnaire representing a response rate of 80%. Distribution of sex was almost equal (48% males Vs 52% females). Over half of children (54%) were of white ethnic background. 12% Blacks, 25% Indians, 4% Chinese and 6% were of mixed race.
442 children (16%) were undergoing orthodontic treatment during the screening, when recording IOTN AC all children were included to explore the need based on aesthetic grounds irrespective of previous or current orthodontic treatment. However when DHC was used, only those who had not received or undergoing any orthodontic treatment were included in the analysis.
To ensure reliability of assessing normative need, 280 subjects of the 2,788 were re-examined. The Cohen's Kappa score would give an indication of the level of agreement between the first and second reading thus indicating intra-examiner reliability.
Kappa scores can either be measured from a 2 × 2 table, giving a simple Kappa score. Alternatively, it can be weighted to account for 'near miss' scores. Both methods were used to measure intra-examiner reliability. The simple Kappa score was 0.89 representing a very good agreement.
Using weighted kappa score, the same principle is used as for measuring simple Kappa but instead the weight is taken into account, Microsoft Excel® was used to calculate weighted Kappa values. For intra-examiner agreement in this study, weighted Kappa was found to be 0.79, representing substantial agreement.
Children's rated IOTN AC by treatment category and ethnicity
IOTN AC score
No need for treatment
Need for treatment
Normative need using IOTN AC
Examiner's rated IOTN AC by treatment category and ethnicity
IOTN AC score
No need for treatment
Need for treatment
Normative need using DHC component
Normative need (IOTN DHC) and ethnicity
No need for treatment
Need for treatment
Agreement between normative and perceived treatment need
Agreement between the dentist and children on IOTN AC
In this cross-sectional study, the proportion of children who were professionally assessed as having a clinically definite need for treatment is lower than previously reported in the child dental health survey for the UK . The perceived need based on the AC component was very low and the overall rating of AC varied slightly between children of ethnic minorities. The only small difference was seen in black children where they perceived their teeth as more attractive than did their white counterparts but again these differences were not statistically significant. Ahmed et al  reported that children from black ethnic minorities were more likely to perceive less need for treatment compared to professional assessment. In contrast, Otuyemi et al  showed no difference in the perceptions of dental aesthetics between adult Nigerians and Americans.
In this study ethnicity did not influence orthodontic need for treatment based on clinical or aesthetic grounds. However children of Indian and Chinese ethnicities had a slightly higher clinical need for treatment. These results are mirrored in Mandall et al  study where they reported that ethnicity did not influence self grading of aesthetics and that Asian adolescents had more need for orthodontic treatment compared to Caucasians using the DHC component.
The disagreement between professional and children's grading of the AC is not unexpected, however this disagreement was not influenced by ethnicity, a result in line with and confirming findings from Mandall et al study .
Perception and prevalence of malocclusion in children of ethnic minorities is not different from the White ones. Perhaps their perceptions may have been influenced by the cultural and societal circumstances in their current place of living and these may be different from the perceptions held by peers living in their original countries.
Self-perception of aesthetics of malocclusion differed significantly from professional assessment; however this disagreement was not confined to ethnicity. The majority of disagreements between children and dentists were at the borderline level of need, perhaps a different threshold of need definition may resolve this discrepancy. It should be noted that disagreement is also influenced by the prevalence of malocclusion and previous experience, in this study the prevalence of severe malocclusion based on aesthetic grounds was low therefore overall agreement should be interpreted carefully.
This study was funded by a grant from Department of Health 112/RDC02055
- Dental Review 2003–2004. 2004, Dental Practice Board PublicationsGoogle Scholar
- Census 2001 National Report for England and Wales. 2003, Stationary Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Roberts-Harry EA, Clerehugh V: Subgingival calculus: where are we now? A comparative review. J Dent. 2000, 28: 93-102. 10.1016/S0300-5712(99)00056-1.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Trottman A, Elsbach HG: Comparison Of Malocclusion In Pre-school Black And White Children. Am J Orthod. 1996, 110: 69-72.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Brunelle JA, Bhat M, Lipton JA: Prevalence and distribution of selected occlusal characteristics in the US population, 1988–1991. J Dent Res. 1996, 75: 706-13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kiyak HA: Dental beliefs, behaviors and health status among Pacific Asians Caucasians. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1981, 9: 10-4.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Shaw WC, O'Brien KD, Richmond S, Brook P: Quality Control In Orthodontics: Risk/Benefit Considerations. Br Dent J. 1991, 170: 33-37. 10.1038/sj.bdj.4807399.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Brook PH, Shaw WC: The Development of an index of orthodontic treatment priority. Eur J Orthod. 1989, 11: 309-320.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Gochman DS: The measurement and development of dentally relevant motives. J Public Health Dent. 1975, 35: 160-164.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Jacobson A: Psychological aspects of dentofacial esthetics and orthognathic surgery. Angle Orthod. 1984, 54: 18-35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Bennett ME, Tulloch JF, Vig KW, Phillips CL: Measuring orthodontic treatment satisfaction: questionnaire development and preliminary validation. J Public Health Dent. 2001, 61: 155-60.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Mandall NA, Wright J, Conboy FM, O'Brien KD: The relationship between normative orthodontic treatment need and measures of consumer perception. Community Dent Health. 2001, 18: 3-6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Birkeland K, Boe OE, Wisth PJ: Orthodontic concern among 11-year-old children and their parents compared with orthodontic treatment need assessed by index of orthodontic treatment need. Am J Orthodont. 1996, 110: 197-205.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ahmed B, Gilthorpe MS, Bedi R: Agreement between normative and perceived orthodontic need amongst deprived multiethnic school children in London. Clin Orthod Res. 2001, 4: 65-71. 10.1034/j.1600-0544.2001.040202.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Mandall NA, McCord JF, Blinkhorn AS, Worthington HV, O'Brien KD: Perceived aesthetic impact of malocclusion and oral self-perceptions in 14–15-year-old Asian and Caucasian children in greater Manchester. Eur J Orthod. 2000, 22: 175-83. 10.1093/ejo/22.2.175.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Pitts(1) NB, Evans(2) DJ, Pine(3) C: British Association for the Study of Community Dentistry (BASCD) Diagnostic Criteria for Caries Prevalence Surveys – 1996/97. Community Dent Health. 1997, 14: 6-9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Burden DJ, Pine CM: Self-perception of malocclusion among adolescents. Community Dent Health. 1995, 12: 89-92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- O'Brien M: Children's dental health in the United Kingdom 1993. 1994, London: HMSOGoogle Scholar
- Otuyemi OD, Ogunyinka A, Dosumu O, Cons NC, Jenny J, Kohout FJ, Jakobsen J: Perceptions of dental aesthetics in the United States and Nigeria. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1998, 26: 418-20.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6831/5/8/prepub
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.