Oral health-related quality of life in patients receiving dental treatment from dental therapists.

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Emma Louwagie, Michelle C Arnett, Aparna Ingleshwar, Mike T John, Danna R Paulson, Yvette G Reibel, Phonsuda Chanthavisouk
{"title":"Oral health-related quality of life in patients receiving dental treatment from dental therapists.","authors":"Emma Louwagie, Michelle C Arnett, Aparna Ingleshwar, Mike T John, Danna R Paulson, Yvette G Reibel, Phonsuda Chanthavisouk","doi":"10.1186/s12955-026-02572-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) measured by the 5-item Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-5) allows characterization of patients' oral health impact into normative values in a university setting. This study aims to derive OHIP-5 normative values for patients seeking care from the dual degree student provider of the dental hygienist and dental therapist in Minnesota.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Normative OHIP-5 values were determined in n = 2,835 patients at the University of Minnesota School of Dentistry, representing sample-based reference distributions. Summary scores were analysed using an empirical cumulative distribution function, with the 90th percentile threshold indicating typical versus elevated impact, while dimensional scores (Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact) assessed as elevated impact were considered frequent item response categories \"fairly often\" or \"very often\".</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The vast majority (90%) of patients seeking care from the dual degree student providers presented an OHIP-5 score of 6 or less, characterizing OHIP-5 scores of 7-20 points as \"non-typically elevated\". The \"non-typically elevated\" dimension scores occurred in 7% of patients for Oral Function, 6% for Orofacial Pain, 11% for Orofacial Appearance, and 2% for Psychosocial Impacts.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Understanding normative OHIP-5 values in patient populations treated by dual degree student providers in dental school settings supports clinical decision-making by guiding diagnostic, referral, and treatment pathways. Their role in preventive and restorative care advances patient-centered outcomes, aligning with the quadruple aim of healthcare.</p>","PeriodicalId":12980,"journal":{"name":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-026-02572-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) measured by the 5-item Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-5) allows characterization of patients' oral health impact into normative values in a university setting. This study aims to derive OHIP-5 normative values for patients seeking care from the dual degree student provider of the dental hygienist and dental therapist in Minnesota.

Methods: Normative OHIP-5 values were determined in n = 2,835 patients at the University of Minnesota School of Dentistry, representing sample-based reference distributions. Summary scores were analysed using an empirical cumulative distribution function, with the 90th percentile threshold indicating typical versus elevated impact, while dimensional scores (Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact) assessed as elevated impact were considered frequent item response categories "fairly often" or "very often".

Results: The vast majority (90%) of patients seeking care from the dual degree student providers presented an OHIP-5 score of 6 or less, characterizing OHIP-5 scores of 7-20 points as "non-typically elevated". The "non-typically elevated" dimension scores occurred in 7% of patients for Oral Function, 6% for Orofacial Pain, 11% for Orofacial Appearance, and 2% for Psychosocial Impacts.

Conclusion: Understanding normative OHIP-5 values in patient populations treated by dual degree student providers in dental school settings supports clinical decision-making by guiding diagnostic, referral, and treatment pathways. Their role in preventive and restorative care advances patient-centered outcomes, aligning with the quadruple aim of healthcare.

接受牙科治疗的患者口腔健康相关的生活质量。
目的:口腔健康相关生活质量(OHRQoL)由5项口腔健康影响概况(OHIP-5)测量,允许在大学环境中将患者口腔健康影响表征为规范值。本研究旨在从明尼苏达州牙科保健师和牙科治疗师的双学位学生提供者那里获得寻求护理的患者的OHIP-5规范值。方法:在明尼苏达大学牙科学院n = 2,835例患者中测定标准OHIP-5值,代表基于样本的参考分布。总结得分使用经验累积分布函数进行分析,第90百分位阈值表示典型影响与升高影响,而维度得分(口腔功能、口腔面部疼痛、口腔面部外观和心理社会影响)被评估为升高影响,被认为是“相当经常”或“非常经常”的频繁项目反应类别。结果:绝大多数(90%)寻求双学位学生提供者护理的患者OHIP-5评分为6分或更低,OHIP-5评分为7-20分为“非典型升高”。“非典型升高”维度评分出现在7%的口腔功能患者、6%的口腔面部疼痛患者、11%的口腔面部外观患者和2%的心理社会影响患者中。结论:了解牙科学校双学位学生治疗的患者群体中OHIP-5的标准值,可以通过指导诊断、转诊和治疗途径来支持临床决策。他们在预防和恢复性护理中的作用推进以患者为中心的结果,与医疗保健的四重目标一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
2.80%
发文量
154
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes is an open access, peer-reviewed, journal offering high quality articles, rapid publication and wide diffusion in the public domain. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes considers original manuscripts on the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) assessment for evaluation of medical and psychosocial interventions. It also considers approaches and studies on psychometric properties of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures, including cultural validation of instruments if they provide information about the impact of interventions. The journal publishes study protocols and reviews summarising the present state of knowledge concerning a particular aspect of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures. Reviews should generally follow systematic review methodology. Comments on articles and letters to the editor are welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书