Comparison of generic and condition-specific oral health-related quality of life instruments in patients with oral submucous fibrosis
With the growing interest in health economics, there is a demand for best valid instrument to assess quality of life (QoL) in patients with oral submucous fibrosis (OSF). The objective of this study was to compare the convergent and discriminative properties of the condition-specific OHRQoL-OSF and generic OHIP-14 in OSF patients.
The OHRQoL-OSF and OHIP-14 instruments were administered concurrently to 300 clinically diagnosed OSF patients. Analysis of both the instruments was carried out by using descriptive statistics. The internal consistency and reproducibility of the instruments were assessed using Cronbach’s alpha and intra-class correlation coefficient respectively. The convergent and discriminative validity were then determined and compared.
The OHRQoL-OSF and OHIP-14 exhibited good psychometric properties for internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha > 0.88) and reproducibility (ICC > 0.85). A positive associations were observed between both the instruments, but a high prevalence of patients with no impact was noted using the OHIP-14. Both the instruments were able to discriminate between patients with different clinical stages of OSF, but OHRQoL-OSF was more responsive in the early stages of OSF. The OHRQoL-OSF demonstrated greater sensitivity for ‘discomfort and functional impairment’.
The condition-specific OHRQoL-OSF identified OSF patients with impaired oral health-related QoL more easily with greater discriminative properties. To better understand patient reported experiences in OSF, these results may guide the choice of instrument in future researches and surveys.
KeywordsQuality of life Oral health Oral submucous fibrosis OHRQoL-OSF OHIP-14
We wish to thank the patients who took part in the study.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with ethical standards of the Institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 3.DHHS. (2000). Oral health in America: A report of the Surgeon General. US Department of Health and Human Services and National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research. Rockville, MD: National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar
- 8.Shevale, V. V., Kalra, R. D., Shevale, V. V., & Shringarpure, M. D. (2012). Management of oral sub-mucous fibrosis: A review. Indian Journal of Dental Sciences, 4, 107–114.Google Scholar
- 10.Rimal, J., & Shrestha, A. (2015). Validation of nepalese oral health impact profile14 and assessment of its impact in patients with oral submucous fibrosis in Nepal. Journal of Nepal Health Research Council, 13, 43–49.Google Scholar
- 11.Kularatna, S., Whitty, J. A., Johnson, N. W., Jayasinghe, R., & Scuffham, P. A. (2016). A comparison of health state utility values associated with oral potentially malignant disorders and oral cancer in Sri Lanka assessed using the EQ-5D-3 L and the EORTC-8D. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 14, 101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Raja, J. V., Rai, P., Kumar, N. C., Khan, M., & Chandrashekar, H. (2013). Psychiatric morbidity among patients with oral submucous fibrosis: A controlled study. Oral Health and Dental Management, 12, 85–94.Google Scholar
- 19.Pindborg, J. J., Murti, P. R., Bhonsle, R. B., Gupta, P. C., Daftary, D. K., & Mehta, F. S. (1984). Oral submucous fibrosis as a precancerous condition. Scandinavian Journal Dental Research, 92, 224–229.Google Scholar