A study on the OHIP-14 of some local women impact on the EQ-5D for review

Ye Hwang Kim; Jung Hwa Lee

doi:10.11149/jkaoh.2015.39.3.180

Journal List > J Korean Acad Oral Health > v.39(3) > 1057646

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Kim and Lee: A study on the OHIP-14 of some local women impact on the EQ-5D for review

Original Article

J Korean Acad Oral Health 2015;39(3):180-185.

Published online: 12 September 2015

DOI: https://doi.org/10.11149/jkaoh.2015.39.3.180

A study on the OHIP-14 of some local women impact on the EQ-5D for review

Ye Hwang Kim¹, Jung Hwa Lee^1,^2,³

¹Department of Biomedical Health Science, Graduate School, Dong-Eui University, Busan, Korea

²Department of Dental Hygiene, College of Nursing and Healthcare Sciences, Dong-Eui University, Busan, Korea

³Research Institution of Nursing and Healthy Science, Dong-Eui University, Busan, Korea

Corresponding Author: Jung Hwa Lee Department of Dental Hygiene, College of Nursing and Healthcare Sciences, Dong-Eui University, 176 Eomgwangno, Busan Jin-gu, Busan 47340, Korea Tel: +82-51-890-4239 Fax: +82-51-505-6878 E-mail: yamako93@deu.ac.kr

Received 9 July 2015 Revised 4 September 2015 Accepted 16 September 2015

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to analyze the OHIP-14 (Oral Health Impact Index) and EQ-5D (health-related quality of life) scores for women in some areas, and to provide basic data as the basis for oral health and systemic health-related quality of life methods improving.

Methods

The subjects included 418 women aged 20-65 years, living in Busan and Gyeongnam between July 20 and September 30, 2014.

Results

OHIP-14 and EQ-5D scores increased with age and educational level; scores were lower in subjects with systemic disease and those with a non-professional occupation. Increased oral health awareness and recognition are both bad health, menopause oral health in one person was related to quality of life, and health-related quality of life scores were significantly lower (P<0001). When considering the oral care OHIP-14 score for more than a year and a time in the scaling 56.07 points, if not receiving was found as a factor affecting the OHIP-14 with 53.33 points (P<0.05), OHIP-14. Higher EQ-5D indicated a significant difference (P<0.001). The OHIP-14 score for factors affecting oral health behavior, depression score, menopause, dry mouth, monthly income, presence of systemic disease, and dentures showed a significant difference for body weight (P<0.01). Significant differences in EQ-5D scores were found for systemic diseases, subjective general health, depression score, and menopause score (P<0.01).

Conclusions

OHIP-14 and EQ-5D will be helpful in the development of oral care and oral health education programs for women.

Keywords: EuroQol-5 dimension (EQ-5D), Oral health impact profile (OHIP), Quality of life

References

1. Jun EM. Cho DS. The relationship of symptoms of stress, cancer prevention behavior and the quality of life in women. Korean J Women Health Nurs. 2005; 11:158–62.

2. Son YJ. The Influencing Factors on Health Related Quality of Life(HRQOL) in Married Working Women. J Korean Acad Adult Nurs. 2007; 19:422–35.

3. Han MA, Ryu SY, Park J, Kang JG, Kim KS. Health-related Quality of Life Assessment by the EuroQol-5D in Some Rural Adults. J Prev Med and Public Health. 2008; 41:173–80.

4. Kim JY. Health-related Quality of Life Model in the Elderly[doctor’s thesis]. Daejeon: Chungnam National University;2009. [Korean].

5. Park JH, Kwon HG, Choi CH, Choi YH. A survey on the oral health condition of institutionalized elderly people resident in free asylum. J Korean Acad Oral Health. 2002; 26:555–566.

6. Richmond S, Chestnutt I, Shennan J, Brown B. The relationship of medical and dental factors to perceived oral and general health. Community Dent Epidemiol. 2007; 35:89–97.

7. Song KH. A study on the evaluation of health- and oral health-related quality of life in Korean adults. J Korean Academy of Dental Hygiene. 2008; 10:39–57.

8. Yoo SH, Kim YE, Lee HS. Oral health-related quality of Life in the elderly with removable denture. J Korean Academy of Dental Hygiene. 2008; 32(4):575–86.

9. Locker D, Miller Y. Evaluation of subjective oral health status indicators. J Public Health Dent. 1994; 54:167–76.

10. Allen PF, McMillan AS. The impact of tooth loss in a denture wearing population an assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile. Community Dent Health. 1999; 16:176–80.

11. Locker D, Slade G. Oral health and the quality of life among older adults the oral health impact profile. J Can Dent Assoc. 1993; 59:830–44.

12. Allen PF, McMollan AS, Locker D. An assessment of sensitivity to change of the Oral Health Impact Profile in an clinical trial. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2001; 29:175–82.

13. Lee EG, Park GH, Park JR, Park JY. A study on OHIP-14 and EQ-5D of residents in some rural areas. J Korean Soc Dent Hyg. 2011; 11:197–11.

14. Kwon HS et al. Oral health education. Chonggumunhwasa. 345–348. 2003.

15. Yalcin F, Gurgan S, Gul G. Oral health in postmenopausal Turkish women. Oral Health Prev Dent. 2006; 4:227–33.

16. Tezal M, Wactawski-Wende J, Gross SG, Dmochowski J, Genco RJ. Periodontal disease and the incidence of tooth loss in postmenopausal women. J Periodontol. 2005; 76:1123–1128.

17. MaGrath C, Bedi R, Gilthorpe MS. Oral Health-related quality of life-view of the public in the United Kingdom. Community Dent Health. 2000; 17:3–7.

18. Kim JH. Impact of oral health on general health and quality of life[doctor’s thesis]. Daegu: Keimyung University;2007. [Korean].

19. Lee MS, Kim SH, Yang JS, Oh JS, Kim DK. Validity and reliability of the Oral Health Impact Profile in elderly Korean 65+. J Korean Acad Dent Health. 2005; 29:210–21.

20. Bae KH, Kim HD, Jung SH, Park DY, Kim JB, Pail DI, et al. Validation of the Korean version of the oral health impact profile among the Korean elderly. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2007; 35:73–79.

21. Locker D, Clarke M, Payne B. Self-perceiver Oral Health Status Psychological Well-being, and Life Satisfaction in Older Adult Population. J Dent Res. 2000; 79:970–75.

22. Kang JK, Lee SM. Relationship between oral-health related quality of life of kindergarten teachers and attempts to improve oral health. J Korean Acad Oral Health. 2010; 34:354–61.

23. Choi JS, Lee YJ, Kim HM, Jung EH, Jo EJ. The association between self-reported oral health problems and oral health-related quality of life. J Korean Acad Oral Health. 2010; 34:411–21.

24. Sanders AE, Slade GD, Lim S, Reisine ST. Impact of oral disease on quality of life in the US and Australian populations. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2009; 37:171–81.

25. Kim SH, Lim SA, Park SJ, Kim DK. Assessment oral Health-related quality of life using the Oral Health Impact Profile(OHIP). J Korean Acad Oral Health. 2008; 28:559–69.

26. Yoon MS. The Study on the Relationship of Psychosocial Factors, Problem drinking on Quality of Life for the Elderly in Urban and Rural Areas. Journal of Welfare for the Aged. 2007; 38:281–310.

27. Yoon MH. Association between oral health and health-related quality of life in adults[master’s thesis]. Daegu: Korea University;2008. [Korean].

Table 1.

Corelation Analysis between OHIP-14 and EQ-5D with general characteristics

	Classification	Total (%)	OHIP-14		EQ-5D
	Classification	(n=418)	M±SD	P	M±SD	P
Age	20 s	68 (16.3)	61.04±7.63^a		14.54±0.78^a
	30 s	65 (15.6)	56.95±10.11^a	0.000***	14.55±0.85^a	0.000***
	40 s	104 (24.9)	58.63±9.66^a		14.13±1.30^a
	≥50 s	181 (43.3)	49.49±11.71^b		13.48±1.39^b
Education background	Middle School	86 (20.6)	47.81±12.75^a		13.40±1.36^a
	High School	200 (47.8)	55.62±10.97^b	0.000***	13.97±1.34^b	0.000***
	College//University	132 (31.6)	58.13±9.08^b		14.39±1.00^c
Systemic disease	Yes	160 (38.3)	51.69±10.46	0.000***	14.46±0.87	0.000***
	None	258 (61.7)	56.74±11.57		13.21±1.48
Job^†	Yes	242 (57.9)	56.20±10.16	0.005**	14.21±1.16	0.000***
	None	173 (42.1)	52.89±12.72		13.70±1.37
Monthly Income	<100	100 (23.9)	53.06±11.73^a		13.52±1.44^a
	100-200	102 (24.4)	51.36±13.23^a		14.06±1.23^b
	200-250	63 (15.1)	55.44±8.99^ab	0.000***	14.25±1.32^b	0.000***
	250≤	153 (36.6)	57.97±9.92^b		14.12±1.15^b
Subjective health condition	Very healthy	85 (20.3)	56.58±13.03^a		14.67±0.70^a
	Healthy	166 (39.7)	56.40±10.93^a		14.40±0.83^ab
	Average	108 (25.8)	55.42±9.94^ab	0.000***	13.69±1.34^b	0.000***
	Unhealthy	53 (12.7)	46.32±9.69^b		12.58±1.13^c
	Very Unhealthy	6 (1.4)	49.33±5.92^ab		10.17±1.72^d
Subjective oral health condition^†	Very healthy	32 (7.7)	53.28±15.29^ab		14.50±0.80^a
	Health	128 (30.6)	57.73±11.35^b		14.38±0.97^ab
	Normal	161 (38.5)	56.78±9.81^b	0.000***	14.07±1.21^ab	0.000***
	Unhealthy	93 (22.2)	48.35±9.95^ab		13.18±1.54^bc
	Very Unhealthy	4 (1.0)	43.75±4.35^a		12.25±1.26^c
Menopause	Yes	163 (39.0)	49.61±10.56		14.37±1.06
	None	255 (61.0)	58.13±10.69	0.000***	13.37±1.39	0.000***

*P<0.05, **P<0.01, ***P<0.001 by t-test, by One way ANOVA.

^† There are missing values in variables.

^† †The same characters was not significant by Scheffe's multiple comparisons at =0.05

Table 2.

OHIP-14 according to oral health behavior

Classification		Total (%)	OHIP-14
Classification		(n=418)	M±SD	P
Clean Toungue when brushing	Yes No	398 (95.2) 20 (4.8)	54.97±11.44 51.50±10.65	0.185
Brushing before going to bed	Yes No	398 (95.2) 20 (4.8)	54.83±11.43 54.25±11.68	0.826
Gums sore when buying drugs	Yes No	177 (42.3) 241 (57.7)	51.31±12.38 57.37±9.92	0.000***
The best way to prevent oral disease is brushing teeth.	Yes No	371 (88.8) 47 (11.2)	55.87±10.89 46.43±12.14	0.000***
Handling toothbrush in right way	Yes No	303 (72.5) 115 (27.5)	55.49±10.73 53.01±12.92	0.069
Intake of fruits and vegetables more than twice in a week	Yes No	338 (80.9) 80 (19.1)	54.53±44.77 55.95±9.77	0.318
The current horizontal brushing	Yes No	207 (49.5) 211 (50.5)	52.29±12.09 57.27±10.15	0.000***
Use of dental floss	Yes No	214 (51.2) 204 (48.8)	54.68±11.89 54.93±10.93	0.824
Brush head sizes that are currently being used bigger than 2-3 teeth in length^†	Yes No	243 (58.3) 174 (41.7)	54.34±11.98 55.56±10.5	0.283
Get Scaling more than once a year	Yes No	225 (53.8) 193 (46.2)	56.07±11.73 53.33±10.87	0.014*

*P<0.05, ***P<0.001 by t-test, by One way ANOVA.

^† There are missing values in variables.

Table 3.

The correlation between OHIP-14 and EQ-5D

	EQ-5D
	Spearman’s	P-value
OHIP-14	0.343	0.000*

*P<0.001.

Table 4.

Multiple regression analysis results of the variables associated with EQ-5D

	EQ-5D
	Model 1		Model 2		Model 3
	B		B		B	
Age	−0.020	−0.199**	−0.013	−0.133**	−0.014	−0.139**
Education level	−0.074	−0.041	−0.076	−0.042	−0.065	−0.036
Monthly Income	0.053	0.050	0.009	0.008	0.018	0.017
Subjective Health Condition	0.645	0.493**	0.462	0.353**	0.448	0.342**
Body weight	−0.010	−0.052	0.001	0.005	0.001	0.003
Subjective Oral Health Condition			0.044	0.031**	0.033	0.023**
Depression scores			−0.056	−0.369	−0.054	−0.353
Dry mouth symptoms			−0.003	−0.033	−0.003	−0.041
Functional limitation					0.025	0.039
Physical pain					0.004	0.007
Psychological discomfort					−0.092	−0.138*
Physical disability					−0.029	−0.045
Psychological disability					0.134	0.205
Social disability					−0.110	−0.164**
Social handicap					0.053	0.083*
R²	0.209		0.295		0.298
Adjusted R²	0.200		0.281		0.276

*P<0.05, **P<0.01.

TOOLS

Similar articles