Larsson P, John M T, Nilner K, List T
Centre for Oral Rehabilitation, Norrköping, Sweden; Department of Orofacial Pain and Jawfunction, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
J Oral Rehabil. 2014 Feb;41(2):148-54. doi: 10.1111/joor.12121. Epub 2013 Dec 23.
This study reports the findings and challenges of the assessment of oro-facial aesthetics in the Swedish general population and the development of normative values for the self-reporting Orofacial Esthetic Scale (OES). In a Swedish national sample of 1406 adult subjects (response rate: 47%), OES decile norms were established. The influence of sociodemographics (gender, age, and education), oral health status and general health status on OES scores was analysed. Mean ± standard deviation of OES scores was 50.3 ± 15.6 units (0, worst score; 70, best score); <1% of the subjects had the minimum score of 0, and 11% had the maximum score of 70 OES units. Orofacial Esthetic Scale score differences were (i) substantial (>5 OES units) for subjects with excellent/very good versus good to poor oral or general health status; ii) small (2 units), but statistically significant for gender (P = 0.01) and two age groups (P = 0.02), and (iii) absent for subjects with college versus no college education (P = 0.31) or with and without dentures (P = 0.90). To estimate normative values for a self-reporting health status, instrument is considered an important step in standardisation, and the developed norms provide a frame of reference in the general population to interpret the Orofacial Esthetic Scale scores.
本研究报告了瑞典普通人群口腔面部美学评估的结果与挑战，以及自我报告式口腔面部美学量表（OES）规范值的制定情况。在一个由1406名成年受试者组成的瑞典全国样本中（应答率：47%），建立了OES十分位数规范。分析了社会人口统计学因素（性别、年龄和教育程度）、口腔健康状况和总体健康状况对OES评分的影响。OES评分的平均值±标准差为50.3±15.6分（0分为最差评分；70分为最佳评分）；不到1%的受试者得最低分0分，11%的受试者得最高分70分。口腔面部美学量表评分差异如下：（i）口腔或总体健康状况为优/非常好与良至差的受试者之间差异显著（>5个OES单位）；（ii）性别（P=0.01）和两个年龄组（P=0.02）之间差异较小（2个单位），但具有统计学意义；（iii）接受大学教育与未接受大学教育的受试者（P=0.31）或佩戴假牙与未佩戴假牙的受试者（P=0.90）之间无差异。为自我报告的健康状况估计规范值，该工具被认为是标准化的重要一步，所制定的规范为普通人群解释口腔面部美学量表评分提供了一个参考框架。
