Oral health-related quality of life after prosthetic rehabilitation: a longitudinal study with the OHIP questionnaire

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Ildikó J. Márton⁵  Gyula Szabó¹  Csongor Kiss⁴  László Nagy⁵  Kinga Bágyi⁵  Csaba Hegedűs²  János Sándor³  Ágnes Jenei⁵ 

[1] Division of Prosthodontics, Department of Dentistry, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Pécs Medical School, 5 Dischka Győző Str, Pécs H-7621, Hungary;Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Debrecen, 98 Nagyerdei Krt, Debrecen H-4032, Hungary;Faculty of Public Health, University of Debrecen, 26 Kassai Street, Debrecen H-4028, Hungary;Division of Pediatric Hemato-oncology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Debrecen, 98 Nagyerdei Krt, Debrecen H-4032, Hungary;Department of Restorative Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Debrecen, 98 Nagyerdei Krt, Debrecen H-4032, Hungary

关键词: Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) questionnaire;    Oral health;    Prosthodontics;    Quality of life;   

Others  :  1223865
DOI  :  10.1186/s12955-015-0289-2

 received in 2014-11-16, accepted in 2015-06-18,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Aspects of oral health related quality of life (OHRQoL) attracted an increased attention recently.

Objective

The aim of the study was to assess self-reported oral health related quality of life (OHRQoL) among patients requiring prosthetic rehabilitation and to determine the rate of improvement 1 month and 6–12 months after therapy. In addition, effect of age, gender, oral health indicators and denture types before treatment were assessed on OHRQoL as evaluated and reported by the patients.

Methods

Hungarian version of OHIP-49 (OHIP-49-H) questionnaire was completed before oral rehabilitation (T0-phase) by 389 patients undergoing prosthetic replacement. After 1 month (T1-phase) and 6–12 months (T2-phase) recall periods 235 and 92 patients completed the questionnaire. The median interquartile range (IQR) values of the total OHIP-49-H score were calculated for T0-, T1- and T2-phases. Reliability of the questionnaire was checked by Cronbach’s statistics. Age, gender, oral health indicators and denture types of patients before and after treatment were recorded and treatment-associated changes in OHRQoL were evaluated.

Results

The study demonstrated the excellent reliability and internal consistency of OHIP-49-H by a high and narrow range of Cronbach’s alpha value (0.81-0.93). A median OHIP-49-H score of 52; IQR = 25-83 demonstrated a poor OHRQoL on first admission. Decreasing median total OHIP-49-H scores 1 month (24; IQR = 9-51; p < 0.001) and 6–12 months (20; IQR = 7-37; p = 0,055) after therapy indicated an improvement of OHRQoL. Patients’ age and CPI value assessed before treatment proved to be significant factors of OHRQoL.

Conclusions

Here we presented representative data about self-assessed OHRQoL of patients requiring prosthetic treatment from Hungary using OHIP-49-H questionnaire. The results demonstrated that the restoration of oral health was associated with an improvement in patients’ OHRQoL. According to the demographical and T0 phase clinical status, the treatment was more effective in the respect of OHIP-49-H score improvement among females (than among males), among younger (than among more aged), and among patients with more serious CPI assessed at T0. The type of prosthetic interventions did not exert a significant effect on total OHIP-49-H score, suggesting that the improvement in OHRQoL is independent from the type of denture applied.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Jenei et al.

【 图 表 】

Fig. 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]World Health Organization. 2006. Constitution of the World Health Organization - Basic Documents, Forty-fifth edition, Supplement, October 2006. http://www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_en.pdf . Access date 22nd March 2010
• [2]Szentpétery A, Szabó G, Marada G, Szántó I, John MT. The hungarian version of the oral health impact profile. Eur J Oral Sci. 2006; 114:197-203.
• [3]Slade DG, Spencer AJ. Development and evaluation of the oral health impact profile. Community Dent Health. 1994; 11:3-11.
• [4]Baran I, Nalcaci R. Self-reported problems before and after prosthodontic treatments according to newly created Turkish version of oral health impact profile. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2011; 53:e99-105.
• [5]Hodacová L, Smejkalová J, Cermáková E, Slezák R, Jacob V, Hlavácková E. Oral health-related quality of life in Czech population. Cent Eur J Public Health. 2010; 18:76-80.
• [6]John MT, Patrick DL, Slade GD. The German version of the oral health impact profile-translation and psychometric properties. Eur J Oral Sci. 2002; 110:425-33.
• [7]Kende D, Szabó G, Marada G, Szentpétery A. Impact of prosthetic care on oral health related quality of life. Fogorv Sz. 2008; 101:49-57.
• [8]Szabó G, John MT, Szántó I, Marada G, Kende D, Szentpétery A. Impaired oral health-related quality of life in Hungary. Acta Odontol Scand. 2011; 69:108-17.
• [9]John MT, Slade G, Szentpétery A, Setz JM. Oral health-related quality of life in patients treated with fixed, removable, and complete dentures 1 month and 6 to 12 months after treatment. Int J Prosthodont. 2004; 17:503-11.
• [10]Locker D. Measuring oral health: A conceptual framework. Community Dent Health. 1988; 5:3-18.
• [11]Locker, D: Health outcomes of oral disorders. Int J Epidemiol 1995, doi:. 10. 1093/ije/24.Supplement_1.S85 webcite
• [12]Likert R. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch Psychol. 1932; 140:1-55.
• [13]John MT, Feuerstahler L, Waller N, Baba K, Larrson P, Celebic A, Kende D, Rener-Sitar K, Reissmann DR. Confirmatory factor analysis of the oral health impact profile. J Oral Rehab. 2014; 41:644-52.
• [14]Baume LJ. ORCA team I on caries statistics. Directions for collecting and recording data on dental caries increments by means of serial examination. Arch Oral Biol. 1961; 4:217-23.
• [15]Ainamo J, Barmes D, Beagne G, Cutress T, Martin J, Sardo Infirri J. Development of the world health (WHO) community periodontal index of treatment needs (CPITN). Int Dental J. 1982; 32:281-91.
• [16]Tsakos G, Allen PF, Steele JG, Locker D. Interpreting oral health-related quality of life data. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2012; 40:193-200.
• [17]DeVellis RF. Scale Development: theory and applications. Applied social research methods series. Sage, Newbury Park; 1991.
• [18]Ng SK, Leung WK. Oral health-related quality of life and periodontal status. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2006; 34:114-22.
• [19]Szabó G, Kende D, Marada G, Szentpétery A. Quality of life and prosthodontics. Fogorv Sz. 2006; 99:91-8.