Neophytou Sophia, Sierwald Ira, Michelaki Ioanna, Reissmann Daniel R
Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Center for Dental and Oral Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Department of Orthodontics, Dentofacial Orthopedics and Pedodontics, Charité - Universitaetsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
J Oral Rehabil. 2018 Dec;45(12):932-938. doi: 10.1111/joor.12715. Epub 2018 Sep 30.
Oro-facial Appearance is increasingly recognised as an important component of patient-reported outcomes in dentistry. While the Oro-facial Esthetic Scale (OES) has sufficient psychometric properties to characterise dental patient's global assessment of Oro-facial Appearance, the equivalence of alternative methods of administration has not been demonstrated so far.
Aim of this study was to investigate whether and to what extent method of administration affects OES scores.
Participants were recruited as convenience sample of 42 adult dental patients registered for a regular recall visit and with no actual need of dental interventions. Oro-facial Appearance was assessed using the German version of the OES applying three methods of administration: (a) face-to-face interview, (b) self-administered questionnaire and (c) telephone interview, in a randomised order with a period of about one week between assessments.
Oro-facial Esthetic Scale summary scores did not differ substantially or statistically significantly between the different methods of administration (two-way ANOVA; P = 0.209). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for pairwise comparisons of administration modes ranged from 0.67 to 0.84 indicating fair to excellent test-retest reliability. Internal consistency was satisfactory with lower limits of the 95% confidence interval (CI) of Cronbach's alpha ranging from 0.82 to 0.88 for the administration modes. Correlations of the OES summary score with a single item assessing global Oro-facial Appearance supported convergent validity with lower limits of the CI of the correlation coefficients ranging between 0.58 and 0.75.
The administration mode has no significant impact on Oro-facial Appearance assessment when using the OES.
口腔面部外观越来越被认为是牙科患者报告结局的一个重要组成部分。虽然口腔面部美学量表（OES）具有足够的心理测量特性来描述牙科患者对口腔面部外观的整体评估，但迄今为止尚未证明不同施测方法的等效性。
本研究的目的是调查施测方法是否以及在多大程度上影响OES评分。
招募了42名成年牙科患者作为便利样本，这些患者登记进行定期复诊且实际不需要牙科干预。使用德语版的OES通过三种施测方法评估口腔面部外观：（a）面对面访谈，（b）自行填写问卷，（c）电话访谈，以随机顺序进行，两次评估之间间隔约一周。
不同施测方法之间的口腔面部美学量表总分没有实质性差异或统计学显著差异（双向方差分析；P = 0.209）。施测模式两两比较的组内相关系数（ICC）范围为0.67至0.84，表明重测信度为中等至优秀。内部一致性令人满意，施测模式的Cronbach's alpha的95%置信区间（CI）下限范围为0.82至0.88。OES总分与评估整体口腔面部外观的单个项目的相关性支持了收敛效度，相关系数CI下限范围在0.58至0.75之间。
使用OES时，施测模式对口腔面部外观评估没有显著影响。
