Cargando…
Interpreting one oral health impact profile point
BACKGROUND: Interpretation of scores from oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) instruments, such as the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) is challenging. It was the aim of this study to determine how many oral impacts correspond to one point of the 49-item OHIP using a new approach which tra...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3598229/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23363450 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-11-12 |
_version_ | 1782262742951919616 |
---|---|
author | Reissmann, Daniel R Sierwald, Ira Heydecke, Guido John, Mike T |
author_facet | Reissmann, Daniel R Sierwald, Ira Heydecke, Guido John, Mike T |
author_sort | Reissmann, Daniel R |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Interpretation of scores from oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) instruments, such as the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) is challenging. It was the aim of this study to determine how many oral impacts correspond to one point of the 49-item OHIP using a new approach which translates numeric problem counts into the traditionally used ordinal OHIP response categories. METHODS: A sample of 145 consecutively recruited prosthodontic patients seeking treatment or having a routine examination completed the German version of the 49-item OHIP with the original ordinal response format as a self-administered questionnaire. In addition, the numerical frequencies of impairment during the previous month were requested in personal interviews. Based on a multilevel mixed-effects linear regression, we estimated the mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI) in numerical frequency between two adjacent ordinal responses. RESULTS: A numerical frequency of 15.2 (CI: 14.8 – 15.7) impacts per month corresponded to one OHIP point. This translates to approximately one impact every other day in the past month. CONCLUSIONS: The oral problem count per day that corresponds to one OHIP-49 point can be used to interpret this instrument’s scores in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. This number can help to better understand OHRQoL burden for patients, clinicians, and researchers alike. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3598229 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-35982292013-03-16 Interpreting one oral health impact profile point Reissmann, Daniel R Sierwald, Ira Heydecke, Guido John, Mike T Health Qual Life Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: Interpretation of scores from oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) instruments, such as the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) is challenging. It was the aim of this study to determine how many oral impacts correspond to one point of the 49-item OHIP using a new approach which translates numeric problem counts into the traditionally used ordinal OHIP response categories. METHODS: A sample of 145 consecutively recruited prosthodontic patients seeking treatment or having a routine examination completed the German version of the 49-item OHIP with the original ordinal response format as a self-administered questionnaire. In addition, the numerical frequencies of impairment during the previous month were requested in personal interviews. Based on a multilevel mixed-effects linear regression, we estimated the mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI) in numerical frequency between two adjacent ordinal responses. RESULTS: A numerical frequency of 15.2 (CI: 14.8 – 15.7) impacts per month corresponded to one OHIP point. This translates to approximately one impact every other day in the past month. CONCLUSIONS: The oral problem count per day that corresponds to one OHIP-49 point can be used to interpret this instrument’s scores in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies. This number can help to better understand OHRQoL burden for patients, clinicians, and researchers alike. BioMed Central 2013-01-30 /pmc/articles/PMC3598229/ /pubmed/23363450 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-11-12 Text en Copyright ©2013 Reissmann et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 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. |
spellingShingle | Research Reissmann, Daniel R Sierwald, Ira Heydecke, Guido John, Mike T Interpreting one oral health impact profile point |
title | Interpreting one oral health impact profile point |
title_full | Interpreting one oral health impact profile point |
title_fullStr | Interpreting one oral health impact profile point |
title_full_unstemmed | Interpreting one oral health impact profile point |
title_short | Interpreting one oral health impact profile point |
title_sort | interpreting one oral health impact profile point |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3598229/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23363450 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-11-12 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT reissmanndanielr interpretingoneoralhealthimpactprofilepoint AT sierwaldira interpretingoneoralhealthimpactprofilepoint AT heydeckeguido interpretingoneoralhealthimpactprofilepoint AT johnmiket interpretingoneoralhealthimpactprofilepoint |