Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and validation of the Liverpool Oral Rehabilitation Questionnaire (LORQ) into the Dutch language

Validation of the German-language version of the Liverpool Oral Rehabilitation Questionnaire version 3 and evaluation of oral-health-related quality of life among patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck

The aim of this study was to translate the Liverpool Oral Rehabilitation Questionnaire version 3 (LORQv3) into German and validate this version in order to assess oral-health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) among head and neck cancer patients. This study was conducted at a German university clinic among patients who had completed therapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC). The original English-language LORQv3 was translated into German according to the forward-backward approach. Validity and reliability were evaluated using further questionnaires related to OHRQoL and psychological impairments. Subgroups were built with reference to oral rehabilitation status and type of cancer therapy. Furthermore, OHRQoL was evaluated. Test-retest reliability was assessed by weighted kappa with a 10-14 day interval. Data were analysed by using Spearman's correlation and the following tests: Shapiro-Wilk, Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney U and Cronbach's alpha. The level of significance was set at α = 0.05. Analysis of the LORQv3 evaluations revealed excellent Cronbach's alpha and high test-retest reliability. Construct validity were supported by the data. LORQv3 summary score and domains were significantly affected by status of oral rehabilitation (p = 0.003, p = 0.008, p = 0.024) and treatment approach (p < 0.001, p = 0.025, p = 0.035). The German version of the LORQv3 showed high reliability and validity and an impaired OHRQoL of HNSCC patients. It can therefore be recommended for the assessment of OHRQoL.

Masticatory performance and oral health-related quality of life in edentulous maxillectomy patients: A cross-sectional study to compare implant-supported obturators and conventional obturators

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this cross-sectional study was to compare the masticatory performance and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of edentulous maxillectomy patients with and without implant-supported obturator prostheses.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Nineteen edentulous maxillectomy patients with completed prosthetic obturator treatment in the upper jaw participated in this study. In nine patients, the obturator prosthesis was supported by implants in the remaining bone of the midface and/or skull base to improve retention. Masticatory performance was measured objectively by the mixing ability test (MAT) and subjectively by three OHRQoL questionnaires: (a) the Oral Health Impact Profile for EDENTulous people (OHIP-EDENT), (b) the Obturator Function Scale (OFS), and (c) the Dutch Liverpool Oral Rehabilitation Questionnaire version 3 (LORQv3-NL). The independent t test and the Mann-Whitney U test were used to test for differences in outcomes of patients with and without implant-retention of their obturator prostheses.

RESULTS

Patients with implant-supported obturator prostheses had significantly better masticatory and oral function, reported fewer chewing difficulties, and had less discomfort during food intake than did patients with a conventional obturator.

CONCLUSION

Supporting prosthetic obturators after maxillectomy with implants improve oral functioning, chewing, and eating comfort. This treatment modality is a viable technique to improve the functionality of prosthetic rehabilitation in patients who have undergone maxillectomy.

[Systematic retrospective study of oral cancer-related quality of life scale]

OBJECTIVE

The quality of life (QOL) related to oral cancer has recently become a focus of clinical studies. This study aims to systematically review the current research situation of QOL of local and foreign oral cancer patients and explore the existing related problems and future research directions to provide references and solutions.

METHODS

Through relevant key words, PubMed, Wiley InterScience, Science Direct, CNKI, and Wanfang databases were first searched. The related target literature from 2000 to 2017 were screened. Finally, the frequency of oral cancer related to QOL scale used in literature was calculated, and the related scales were briefly introduced.

RESULTS

From the target literature, 218 English target literature, 55 Chinese target literature, 24 English scales, and 12 Chinese scales were selected. The most widely used scales for assessing the QOL of patients with oral cancer were as follows: University of Washington Quality of Life Questionnaire (UW-QOL), European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30/Head and Neck 35 (EORTC QLQ-C30/H&N35), 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head and Neck (FACT-H&N), and Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP).

CONCLUSIONS

The QOL related to oral cancer was well underway, and the study of geographical distribution was widespread. However, the work on self-developed scale remains inadequate. UW-QOL, EORTC QLQ-C30/H&N35, and FACT-H&N can be utilized as the preferred scales for evaluating the QOL of oral cancer patients. A specific disease-related function scale can also be selected according to specific research objectives.