Translation and validation of the Croatian version of the Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (OIDP) scale

Abstract

The Croatian OIDP index showed good psychometric properties in terms of construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability and responsiveness confirming its appropriateness for use among Croatian population.

Integration of oral health-related quality of life instruments

“…While the OHIP-49 has documented sufficient psychometric properties in all six study countries [11,12,15–18], specific GOHAI [1,4,20,21] and OIDP [22–24] language versions and the extra OHIP questions were only available for some settings. We did not perform a rigorous cross-cultural adaptation, which is a limitation.…”

“…For example, the previous GOHAI item was adapted to ‘Have you had difficulty biting any foods because of problems with your teeth, mouth, jaw or dentures in the last month?’ Available language versions of the GOHAI [1,4,20,21] and the OIDP [22–24] were used to guide the adaptation process. Then, the three experts assigned the 22 items to the four OHIP-based dimensions of Oral Function , Orofacial Pain , Orofacial Appearance , and Psychosocial Impact .…”

Smile Aesthetics Satisfaction Scale: development and validation of a new brief five-item measure of satisfaction with smile aesthetics in adults and the elderly

“…These emotional dimensions are probably not significantly expressed in this older age group regardless of the clinical situation. Furthermore, the SASS does not measure the construct similarly to the OIDP. The OIDP measures the impairment of eight everyday activities caused by dental problems as a summary measure of frequency and degree of impaired activity.…”

“…The new aesthetic questionnaire was created with this situation in mind because in just a few minutes it provides the therapist with guidelines and signals particular behavioural changes and reactions during and after the therapy. Table 3 Pearson and point-biserial correlations with noted constructs for the assessment of convergent validity and clinical parameters Variables SASS 11.5 AE 3.0 (5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15) Hiding teeth when smiling (0 = no; 1 = yes) r À0.403 0 = 89.3%; 1 = 10.7% P <0.001 Self-perceived poor restorations (0 = no; 1 = yes) r À0.391 0 = 90.9%; 1 = 9.1% P <0.001 Self-perceived tooth fractures (0 = no; 1 = yes) r À0.208 0 = 85.1%; 1 = 14.9% P <0.001 Self-perceived tooth misalignment (0 = no; 1 = yes) r À0.374 0 = 75.4%; 1 = 24.6% P <0.001 Desire for better dental aesthetics (0 = no; 1 = yes) r À0.353 0 = 37.6%; 1 = 62.4% P <0.001 Desire for tooth whitening (0 = no; 1 = yes) r À0.298 0 = 36.8%; 1 = 63.2% P <0.001 Desire for orthodontic therapy (0 = no; 1 = yes) r À0.268 0 = 44.3%; 1 = 55.7% P <0.001 Desire for prosthetic rehabilitation (0 = no; 1 = yes) r À0.347 0 = 44.1%; 1 = 55.9% P <0.001 OIDP r 0. Based on the data derived from these measures, the treating clinician may adjust his/her patient approach depending on the proportional representation of certain components.…”

Development and validation of a new condition‐specific instrument for evaluation of smile esthetics‐related quality of life

“…Newly created questionnaire is a valid short instrument for patient reported outcome measures of psychosocial impacts of altered smile esthetics. The instrument covers the emotions and behaviors previously recognized as important and dominant in several existing QoL instruments . These contents are embarrassment, shame, sadness, worry, frequent preoccupation about own appearance, pride, enjoyment in company of other people, and avoidance of social contacts because of own appearance.…”