Advertisement

Quality of Life Research

, Volume 27, Issue 10, pp 2619–2627 | Cite as

Oral health-related quality of life of children and adolescents with and without migration background in Germany

  • Ghazal Aarabi
  • Daniel R. Reissmann
  • Darius Sagheri
  • Julia Neuschulz
  • Guido Heydecke
  • Christopher Kofahl
  • Ira Sierwald
Article

Abstract

Objectives

To compare oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in children and adolescents with and without migration background, and to assess whether potential differences in OHRQoL can be sufficiently explained by oral health characteristics.

Materials und methods

A consecutive sample of 112 children and adolescents was recruited in a German university-based orthodontic clinic, and a convenience sample of 313 children and adolescents of German public schools was enrolled in the study (total N = 425, age range 7–17 years). However, 29 participants were excluded due to insufficient information regarding migration background. Accordingly, the non-migrant group consisted of 262 participants (61.6%). For children with migration background, two groups were classified: (i) one parent born in a foreign country (N = 41, 9.6%, single-sided migration background), and (ii) both parents and/or child born in a foreign country ( N= 93, 21.9%, double-sided migration background). OHRQoL was assessed using the German 19-item version of the Child Oral Health Impact Profile (COHIP-G19). Additionally, physical oral health of 269 children with classified migration background was determined in a dental examination.

Results

Overall, OHRQoL was significantly lower in the group with double-sided migration background indicated by lower COHIP-G19 summary scores (mean: 58.6 points) than in the group with single-sided migration background (mean: 63.3 points) or the non-migrant group (mean: 63.2 points). Likewise, the summary scores of the subscale “oral health well-being” and the subscale “social/emotional, school, and self-image” were also lower in the double-sided migrant group than in the other two groups. Linear regression analysis showed an association between double-sided migration background and impaired OHRQoL, even after statistically controlling for demographic, socioeconomic, and oral health characteristics.

Conclusion

Children and adolescents with double-sided migration background have poorer OHRQoL than comparably aged migrants with single-sided migration background or non-migrations. Between-group differences in OHRQoL could not be sufficiently explained by effects of socioeconomic status or physical oral health characteristics. Thus, other methodological, cultural, or immigration-related factors might also play an important role for the observed effects.

Keywords

Child Oral Health Impact Profile Oral health-related quality of life Children Migration 

Notes

Funding

This study was partly funded by the German Orthodontic Society (DGKFO; Grant Reference: 49). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Knopf, H., Rieck, A., & Schenk, L. (2008). [Oral hygiene. KIGGS data on caries preventative behaviour]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz, 51, 1314–1320.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ugur, Z. A., & Gaengler, P. (2002). Utilisation of dental services among a Turkish population in Witten, Germany. International Dental Journal, 52, 144–150.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schenk, L., & Knopf, H. (2007). Oral health behaviour of children and adolescents in Germany. First results of the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS). Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz, 50, 653–658.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kurth, B. M. (2007). The German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS): An overview of its planning, implementation and results taking into account aspects of quality management. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz, 50, 533–546.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    van Steenkiste, M., Becher, A., Banschbach, R., Gaa, S., Kreckel, S., & Pocanschi, C. (2004). Prevalence of caries, fissure sealants and filling materials among German children and children of migrants. Gesundheitswesen, 66, 754–758.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gift, H. C., Atchison, K. A., & Dayton, C. M. (1997). Conceptualizing oral health and oral health-related quality of life. Social Science and Medicine, 44, 601–608.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Marschalck, P., & Wiedl, K. H. (2005). Migration und Krankheit. Osnabrück: IMIS-Schriften.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Razum, O., Zeeb, H., Meesmann, U., Schenk, L., Bredehorst, M., Brzoska, P., et al. (2008). Migration und Gesundheit. Schwerpunktbericht der Gesundheitsberichterstattung. Berlin: Robert Koch-Institut.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Aarabi, G., Reissmann, D. R., Seedorf, U., Becher, H., Heydecke, G., & Kofahl, C. (2017). Oral health and access to dental care—A comparison of elderly migrants and non-migrants in Germany. Ethnicity and Health.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13557858.2017.1294658.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aarabi, G., Reissmann, D., Farhan, D., Heydecke, G., & Kofahl, C. (2013). Die Mundgesundheit von Menschen mit Migrationshintergrund in Deutschland - eine kritische Betrachtung der vorliegenden Studien. Deutsche Zahnärztliche Zeitung, 68, 280–287.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sierwald, I., John, M. T., Sagheri, D., Neuschulz, J., Schüler, E., Splieth, C., et al. (2016). The German 19-item version of the Child Oral Health Impact Profile: Translation and psychometric properties. Clinical Oral Investigations, 20, 301–313.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    C. Currie, C. Roberts, A. Morgan, R. Smith, W. Settertobulte, O. Samdal, Rasmussen, V. (2004). Young people’s health in context. Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC) study: International report from the 2001/2002 survey. Copenhagen: Health Policy for Children and Adolescents.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    World Health Organization. (2013). Oral health surveys: Basic methods (5th ed.). Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ainamo, J., Barmes, D., Beagrie, G., Cutress, T., Martin, J., & Sardo-Infirri, J. (1982). Development of the World Health Organization (WHO) community periodontal index of treatment needs (CPITN). International Dental Journal, 32, 281–291.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Burden, D. J., Pine, C. M., & Burnside, G. (2001). Modified IOTN: An orthodontic treatment need index for use in oral health surveys. Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology, 29, 220–225.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brook, P. H., & Shaw, W. C. (1989). The development of an index of orthodontic treatment priority. European Journal of Orthodontics, 11, 309–320.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1997). Cronbach’s alpha. British Medical Journal, 314, 572.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7, 309–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    John, M. T., Patrick, D. L., & Slade, G. D. (2002). The German version of the Oral Health Impact Profile—Translation and psychometric properties. European Journal of Oral Science, 110, 425–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Statistisches Bundesamt (2012). Bevölkerung mit Migrationshindergrund. Ergebnisse des Mikrozensus 2011. Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ghazal Aarabi
    • 1
  • Daniel R. Reissmann
    • 1
  • Darius Sagheri
    • 2
  • Julia Neuschulz
    • 3
  • Guido Heydecke
    • 1
  • Christopher Kofahl
    • 4
  • Ira Sierwald
    • 5
    • 6
  1. 1.Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Center for Dental and Oral MedicineUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfHamburgGermany
  2. 2.Department of Public and Child Dental HealthDublin Dental University HospitalDublinIreland
  3. 3.Department of OrthodonticsUniversity Medical Center of CologneCologneGermany
  4. 4.Department of Medical Sociology, Center for Psychosocial MedicineUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-EppendorfHamburgGermany
  5. 5.Private Orthodontic Practice Kieferorthopaedie BuxtehudeBuxtehudeGermany
  6. 6.Department of Orthodontics, Dentofacial Orthopedics and PedodonticsCharité – Universitätsmedizin BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations