The Scottish Orthodontic Peer Review project: the outcome of treatment and standard of record keeping by orthodontic specialist practitioners in Scotland

References

• Birkeland K, Boe OE, Wisth PJ. 1997. Subjective assessment of dental and psychosocial effects of orthodontic treatment. J Orofac Orthop. 58:44–61.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• British Orthodontic Society. 2014a. Find a treatment. http://www.bos.org.uk/Find-a-Treatment.
   Google Scholar
• British Orthodontic Society. 2014b. Quality assurance in NHS Primary Care Orthodontics. http://www.bos.org.uk/Professionals-Members/Research-Audit/Quality-Assurance-in-Orthodontics/Quality-Assurance-in-NHS-Primary-Care-Orthodontics.
   Google Scholar
• Brooke PH, Shaw WC. 1989. The development of an index of orthodontic treatment priority. Eur J Orthod. 11:309–320. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.ejo.a035999
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buchanan IB, Shaw WC, Richmond S, O’Brien KD, Andrews M. 1993. A comparison of the reliability and validity of the PAR Index and Summers’ Occlusal Index. Eur J Orthod. 15:27–31. doi: 10.1093/ejo/15.1.27
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bullock AD, Butterfield S, Belfield CR, Morris ZS, Ribbins PM, Frame JW. 2000. Professional development: a role for clinical audit and peer review in the identification of continuing professional development needs for general dental practitioners: a discussion. Br Dent J. 189:445–448.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cole A, McMichael A. 2009. Audit of dental practice record-keeping: a PCT-coordinated clinical audit by Worcestershire dentists. Prim Dent Care. 16:85–93. doi: 10.1308/135576109788634296
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• D’Cruz L, Kaney H. 2015. Consent - a new era begins. Br Dent J. 219:57–59. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2015.555
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doran GT. 1981. There’s a SMART way to write management’s goals and objectives. Manage Rev. 70:35–36.
   Google Scholar
• Dyken RA, Sadowsky PL, Hurst D. 2001. Orthodontic outcomes assessment using the Peer Assessment Rating index. Angle Orthodontist. 71:164–169.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eaton KA, Fleming WG, Rich JL. 1998. A report of an evaluation of the pilot peer review scheme for general dental practitioners working in the general dental services in England. Br Dent J. 184:178–182. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4809574
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox NA. 1993. The first 100 cases: a personal audit of orthodontic treatment assessed by the PAR (Peer Assessment Rating) index. Br Dent J. 174:290–297. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4808157
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox NA, Richmond S, Wright JL, Daniels CP. 1997. Factors affecting the outcome of orthodontic treatment within the general dental service. Br J Orthod. 24:217–221. doi: 10.1093/ortho/24.3.217
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• General Dental Council. 2017. Specialist Register. https://olr.gdc-uk.org/searchregister.
   Google Scholar
• Hamdan AM, Rock WP. 1999. An appraisal of the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index and a suggested new weighting system. Eur J Orthod. 21:181–192. doi: 10.1093/ejo/21.2.181
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hinman C. 1995. The dental practice board – the current status. Br J Orthod. 22:287–290. doi: 10.1179/bjo.22.3.287
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Information Services Division Scotland. 2017. Dental statistics – NHS treatment and fees. http://www.isdscotland.org/Health-Topics/Dental-Care/Publications/2017-09-19/2017-09-19-DentalFees-Report.pdf?
   Google Scholar
• Kelly BM, Springate SD. 1996. Specialist orthodontics in the general dental service. Br Dent J. 180:209–215. doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.4809029
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kerr WJ, Buchanan IB, McColl JH. 1993. The use of the PAR in assessing the effectiveness of removable orthodontic appliances. Br J Orthod. 20:351–357. doi: 10.1179/bjo.20.4.351
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kolb DA. 2014. Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. 2nd ed. In: Neidlinger A. editor. New Jersey (NY): FT Press; p. 18–20.
   Google Scholar
• Linge L, Linge BO. 1991. Patient characteristics and treatment variables associated with root resorption during orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 99:35–43. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(05)81678-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Llewellyn SK, Hamdan AM, Rock WR. 2007. An index of orthodontic treatment complexity. Eur J Orthod. 29:186–192. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjl080
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayers M, Firestone AR, Rashid R, Vig KW. 2005. Comparison of Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index scores of plaster and computer-based digital models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 128:431–434. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.04.035
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGorray SP, Wheeler TT, Keeling SD, Yurkiewicz L, Taylor MG, King GJ. 1999. Evaluation of orthodontists’ perception of treatment need and the peer assessment rating (PAR) index. Angle Orthod. 69:325–333.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKeown HF, Murray AM, Sandler PJ. 2005. How to avoid common errors in clinical photography. J Orthod. 32:43–54. doi: 10.1179/146531205225020880
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Morgan RG. 2001. Quality assurance: quality evaluation of clinical records of a group of general dental practitioners entering a quality assurance programme. Br Dent J. 191:436–441.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Health Service Inform. 2017. National Service Directory – dental services. https://www.nhsinform.scot/national-service-directory/dental-services.
   Google Scholar
• O’Brien KD, Shaw WC, Roberts CT. 1993. The use of occlusal indices in assessing the provision of orthodontic treatment by the hospital orthodontic service of England and Wales. Br J Orthod. 20:25–35. doi: 10.1179/bjo.20.1.25
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Richmond S, Andrews M. 1993. Orthodontic treatment standards in Norway. Eur J Orthod. 15:7–15. doi: 10.1093/ejo/15.1.7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Richmond S, Andrews M, Roberts CT. 1993. The provision of orthodontic care in the general dental services of England and Wales: extraction patterns, treatment duration, appliance types and standards. Br J Orthod. 20:345–350. doi: 10.1179/bjo.20.4.345
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Richmond S, Shaw WC, O'Brien KD, Buchanan IB, Jones R, Stephens CD, Roberts CT, Andrews M. 1992a. The development of the PAR index (Peer Assessment Rating): reliability and validity. Eur J Orthod. 14:125–139. doi: 10.1093/ejo/14.2.125
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Richmond S, Shaw WC, Roberts CT, Andrews M. 1992b. The PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): methods to determine outcome of orthodontic treatment in terms of improvement and standards. Eur J Orthod. 14:180–187. doi: 10.1093/ejo/14.3.180
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roberts CT, Richmond S. 1997. The design and analysis of reliability studies for the use of epidemiological and audit indices in orthodontics. Br J Orthod. 24:139–147. doi: 10.1093/ortho/24.2.139
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stevens DR, Flores-Mir C, Nebbe B, Raboud DW, Heo G, Major PW. 2006. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of plaster vs digital study models: comparison of peer assessment rating and Bolton analysis and their constituent measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 129:794–803. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.08.023
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Supreme Court. 2015. Montgomery (Appellant) v Lanarkshire Health Board (Respondent) (Scotland) (2015) UKSC 104. https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2013-0136.html.
   Google Scholar
• Teh LH, Kerr WJ, McColl JH. 2000. Orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances in the general dental service in Scotland. Br J Orthod. 27:175–180. doi: 10.1093/ortho/27.2.175
   Google Scholar
• Turbill EA, Richmond S, Andrews M. 1994. A preliminary comparison of the DPB’s grading of completed orthodontic cases with the PAR index. Br J Orthod. 21:279–285. doi: 10.1179/bjo.21.3.279
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Turbill EA, Richmond S, Wright JL. 1996a. A critical assessment of orthodontic standards in England and Wales (1990–1991) in relation to changes in prior approval. Br J Orthod. 23:221–228. doi: 10.1179/bjo.23.3.221
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Turbill EA, Richmond S, Wright JL. 1996b. Assessment of general dental services orthodontic standards: the dental practice board’s gradings compared to PAR and IOTN. Br J Orthod. 23:211–220. doi: 10.1179/bjo.23.3.211
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Turbill EA, Richmond S, Wright JL. 1998. A critical assessment of high-earning orthodontists in the general dental services of England and Wales (1990–1991). Br J Orthod. 25:47–54. doi: 10.1093/ortho/25.1.47
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Turbill EA, Richmond S, Wright JL. 1999. A closer look at general dental service orthodontics in England and Wales. II: what determines appliance selection? Br Dent J. 187:271–274.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar