Does different wording of a global oral health question provide different results?
2015 (English)In: Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, ISSN 0001-6357, E-ISSN 1502-3850, Vol. 73, no 4, 250-257 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Objective. Focusing on 70-year-old adults in Sweden and guided by the conceptual framework of International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps (ICIDH), the purpose of this study was to examine the extent to which socio-demographic characteristics, self-reported oral disease and social/psychological/physical oral health outcome variables are associated with two global measures of self-assessed satisfaction with oral health in Swedish 70-year-olds and if there is a degree of discordance between these global questions. Background. It has become an important task to create a simple way to measure self-perceived oral health. In these attempts to find practical ways to measure health, the global oral health question is a possible tool to measure self-rated oral health, but there is limited knowledge about how important the wording of this question is. Materials and methods. In 2012, a questionnaire was mailed to all persons born in 1942 in two Swedish counties, Orebro (T) and Ostergotland (E). The total population of 70-year-olds amounted to 7889. Bivariate analyses were conducted by cross-tabulation and Chi-square statistics. Multivariate analyses were conducted using binary multiple logistic regression. Results. The two global oral health question of 70-year-olds in Sweden was mainly explained by the number of teeth (OR = 5.6 and 5.2), chewing capacity (OR = 6.9 and 4.2), satisfaction with dental appearance (OR = 19.8 and 17.3) and Oral Impact on Daily Performance (OIDP) (OR = 3.5 and 3.9). Conclusion. Regardless of the wording, it seems that the concept of a global oral health question has the same main determinants.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Informa Healthcare , 2015. Vol. 73, no 4, 250-257 p.
elderly; global oral health question; OHRQoL
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-117196DOI: 10.3109/00016357.2013.794390ISI: 000351506000002PubMedID: 23919598OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-117196DiVA: diva2:807243
Funding Agencies|Department of Dentistry, Orebro County; Dental Commissioning Unit, Ostergotland County2015-04-232015-04-212016-01-07