90
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    8
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Assessment of oral health related quality of life

      review-article
      1 ,
      Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
      BioMed Central

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In Dentistry, as in other branches of Medicine, it has been recognised that objective measures of disease provide little insight into the impact of oral disorders on daily living and quality of life. A significant body of development work has been undertaken to provide health status measures for use as outcome measures in dentistry. In descriptive population studies, poor oral health related quality of life is associated with tooth loss. There is a less extensive literature of longitudinal clinical trials, and measurement of change and interpretation of change scores continues to pose a challenge. This paper reviews the literature regarding the development and use of these oral health related QoL measures and includes an appraisal of future research needs in this area.

          Related collections

          Most cited references54

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Derivation and validation of a short-form oral health impact profile.

          Growing recognition that quality of life is an important outcome of dental care has created a need for a range of instruments to measure oral health-related quality of life. This study aimed to derive a subset of items from the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-49)-a 49-item questionnaire that measures people's perceptions of the impact of oral conditions on their well-being. Secondary analysis was conducted using data from an epidemiologic study of 1217 people aged 60+ years in South Australia. Internal reliability analysis, factor analysis and regression analysis were undertaken to derive a subset (OHIP-14) questionnaire and its validity was evaluated by assessing associations with sociodemographic and clinical oral status variables. Internal reliability of the OHIP-14 was evaluated using Cronbach's coefficient alpha. Regression analysis yielded an optimal set of 14 questions. The OHIP-14 accounted for 94% of variance in the OHIP-49; had high reliability (alpha = 0.88); contained questions from each of the seven conceptual dimensions of the OHIP-49; and had a good distribution of prevalence for individual questions. OHIP-14 scores and OHIP-49 scores displayed the same pattern of variation among sociodemographic groups of older adults. In a multivariate analysis of dentate people, eight oral status and sociodemographic variables were associated (P < 0.05) with both the OHIP-49 and the OHIP-14. While it will be important to replicate these findings in other populations, the findings suggest that the OHIP-14 has good reliability, validity and precision.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Development and evaluation of the Oral Health Impact Profile.

            The capacity of dental clinicians and researchers to assess oral health and to advocate for dental care has been hampered by limitations in measurements of the levels of dysfunction, discomfort and disability associated with oral disorders. The purpose of this research was to develop and test the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP), a scaled index of the social impact of oral disorders which draws on a theoretical hierarchy of oral health outcomes. Forty nine unique statements describing the consequences of oral disorders were initially derived from 535 statements obtained in interviews with 64 dental patients. The relative importance of statements within each of seven conceptual subscales was assessed by 328 persons using Thurstone's method of paired comparisons. The consistency of their judgements was confirmed (Kendall's mu, P < 0.05). The reliability of the instrument was evaluated in a cohort of 122 persons aged 60 years and over. Internal reliability of six subscales was high (Cronbach's alpha, 0.70-0.83) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.42-0.77) demonstrated stability. Validity was examined using longitudinal data from the 60 years and over cohort where the OHIP's capacity to detect previously observed associations with perceived need for a dental visit (ANOVA, p < 0.05 in five subscales) provided evidence of its construct validity. The Oral Health Impact Profile offers a reliable and valid instrument for detailed measurement of the social impact of oral disorders and has potential benefits for clinical decision-making and research.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Book: not found

              Psychometric theory

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Health Qual Life Outcomes
                Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
                BioMed Central (London )
                1477-7525
                2003
                8 September 2003
                : 1
                : 40
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Restorative Dentistry, University Dental School & Hospital, Wilton, Cork, Ireland
                Article
                1477-7525-1-40
                10.1186/1477-7525-1-40
                201012
                14514355
                c677d015-a0d9-4a73-86a5-f279643b8b38
                Copyright © 2003 Allen; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the article's original URL.
                History
                : 14 July 2003
                : 8 September 2003
                Categories
                Review

                Health & Social care
                Health & Social care

                Comments

                Comment on this article