Allen P F, McMillan A S, Walshaw D, Locker D
Department of Restorative Dentistry, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1999 Oct;27(5):344-52. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1999.tb02031.x.
In recent years, a number of instruments have been developed to measure the outcomes of oral disease. The Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) is the most sophisticated and comprehensive measure developed to date. At present, reports of the use of this measure are confined to descriptive population studies.
The aim of this study was to compare the validity of the OHIP with a generic health-related quality of life measure, the SF36.
Study subjects were in three groups, namely, edentulous patients seeking dental implants ("implant subjects", n = 32), edentulous patients seeking conventional dentures ("edentulous control", n = 35) and dentate patients ("dentate control", n = 21). All subjects completed an OHIP and SF36 prior to receiving any treatment. The edentulous subjects also completed a subjective assessment of satisfaction with their existing conventional dentures. OHIP data were computed using the simple count and weighted scores methods.
The median number of negative impacts reported for each group was: 17 (implant subjects), six (conventional control) and one (dentate control). OHIP sub-scale scores were significantly higher (P < 0.001) for implant subjects than control subjects. There were no significant differences between the SF36 sub-scale scores. There was a significant correlation (P < or = 0.01) between aspects of satisfaction with conventional dentures worn by the edentulous subjects and OHIP sub-scale scores. Correlations between denture satisfaction variables and SF36 scores were not significant.
It was concluded that the OHIP shows good discriminant and construct validity properties. As it is oral specific, it will be of greater use in measuring outcomes of oral disorders than generic measures such as SF36. This finding will be relevant when considering the use of health-related quality of life measures to target resources and measure the outcome of clinical intervention.
近年来,已开发出多种用于测量口腔疾病结果的工具。口腔健康影响程度量表(OHIP)是迄今为止开发出的最精密、最全面的测量工具。目前,关于该测量工具使用情况的报告仅限于描述性的人群研究。
本研究旨在比较OHIP与一般健康相关生活质量测量工具SF36的有效性。
研究对象分为三组,即寻求种植牙的无牙患者(“种植牙组”,n = 32)、寻求传统假牙的无牙患者(“无牙对照组”,n = 35)和有牙患者(“有牙对照组”,n = 21)。所有研究对象在接受任何治疗前均完成了OHIP和SF36测评。无牙患者还对其现有的传统假牙进行了主观满意度评估。OHIP数据采用简单计数法和加权评分法进行计算。
每组报告的负面影响中位数分别为:17(种植牙组)、6(传统假牙对照组)和1(有牙对照组)。种植牙组的OHIP分量表得分显著高于对照组(P < 0.001)。SF36分量表得分之间无显著差异。无牙患者对传统假牙的满意度方面与OHIP分量表得分之间存在显著相关性(P ≤ 0.01)。假牙满意度变量与SF36得分之间的相关性不显著。
得出的结论是,OHIP具有良好的区分效度和结构效度特性。由于它是针对口腔的,在测量口腔疾病结果方面比SF36等一般测量工具更有用。在考虑使用健康相关生活质量测量工具来分配资源和测量临床干预结果时,这一发现将具有重要意义。