Psychometric Properties of the Brazilian Version of GOHAI among Community-Dwelling Elderly People

Psychometric Properties of General Oral Health Assessment Index Across Ages: COSMIN Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the psychometric properties of the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI) across age groups using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology.

METHODS

Data: English peer-reviewed articles reporting studies of the development, translation, or validation of GOHAI.

SOURCES

PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE from Jan 1990 until December 31, 2023. Methodological evaluation: based on COSMIN methodology. The results are presented overall and for 4 age groups (≥60 years, all ages, <60 years, ≤45 years). Structural validity was summarized qualitatively. Internal consistency and reliability were synthesized via random-effects meta-analysis of T-transformed Cronbach α values, and Fisher's Z transformed correlation coefficients. Construct validity and responsiveness were assessed using effect sizes.

RESULTS

Four hundred ninety-seven records were identified, 72 underwent full-text assessment, resulting in 60 included reports. Structural validity was inconsistent across all age groups and overall. Internal consistency was sufficient with overall α = 0.81, and high evidence quality. Test-retest reliability was consistently sufficient across age groups with overall r = 0.84. For construct validity 361 hypotheses were assessed (37.4% for convergent-, 62.6% for known-groups validity). The percentage of confirmed hypotheses in ≥60-years, all ages, <60-years and ≤45-years were 75.5%, 66.7%, 78.9%, and 88.9%, respectively. Responsiveness was not assessed in the <60-years and ≤45-years age groups, leading to indeterminate overall rating with very low evidence quality.

CONCLUSIONS

This review affirms that GOHAI has sufficient psychometric properties as an oral health-related quality of life instrument in various age groups, but its responsiveness is scarcely researched and its utility for individual-level follow-up is limited. The measurement properties of oral health-related quality of life tools must be scrutinized in the changing demands of personalized and value-based dental care. (PROSPERO registration: CRD42022384132).

Development and Validation of Oral Health-Related Quality of Life Scale for Patients Undergoing Endodontic Treatment (OHQE) for Irreversible Pulpitis

An oral health-related quality of life measure specific to patients undergoing endodontic treatment has not been developed. This study aimed to validate the oral health-related quality of life scale for patients undergoing endodontic treatment (OHQE) for irreversible pulpitis, comprised of 42 questions. Sixty-two patients with irreversible pulpitis, comprising 23 (37.1%) males and 39 (62.9%) females, were enrolled between August 2022 and February 2023. Data were collected at three time points: pretreatment, post-treatment, and at the second week post-treatment. Factor analysis revealed physical, psychological, and expectations as subscales of OHQE. Cronbach's alpha coefficients ranged from 0.87 to 0.95 for each subscale. Each subscale of the General Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI) was moderately correlated with the OHQE subscales. Good-poor analysis revealed a significant difference between the high-scoring and low-scoring groups for each OHQE subscale. The intraclass correlation coefficients of the OHQE subscales ranged from 0.89 to 0.95. Multivariate linear regression analysis revealed a significant correlation between the pretreatment and post-treatment psychological factors (p < 0.05). Thus, OHQE will help researchers and policymakers understand the impact of oral health on the quality of life of patients with irreversible pulpitis undergoing endodontic treatment. OHQE could contribute to the appropriate planning, treatment decisions, and management of dental treatment.

Health measurement instruments and their applicability to military veterans: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Accurate measurement of health status is essential to assess veterans' needs and the effects of interventions directed at improving veterans' well-being. We conducted a systematic review to identify instruments that measure subjective health status, considering four components (ie, physical, mental, social or spiritual well-being).

METHODS

Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, we searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, JSTOR, ERIC, Social Sciences Abstracts and ProQuest in June 2021 for studies reporting on the development or evaluation of instruments measuring subjective health among outpatient populations. We assessed risk of bias with the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments tool and engaged three veteran partners to independently assess the clarity and applicability of identified instruments.

RESULTS

Of 5863 abstracts screened, we identified 45 eligible articles that reported health-related instruments in the following categories: general health (n=19), mental health (n=7), physical health (n=8), social health (n=3) and spiritual health (n=8). We found evidence for adequate internal consistency for 39 instruments (87%) and good test-retest reliability for 24 (53%) instruments. Of these, our veteran partners identified five instruments for the measurement of subjective health (Military to Civilian Questionnaire (M2C-Q), Veterans RAND 36-Item Health Survey (VR-36), Short Form 36, Abbreviated World Health Organization Quality of Life questionnaire (WHOQOL-BREF) and Sleep Health Scale) as clear and very applicable to veterans. Of the two instruments developed and validated among veterans, the 16-item M2C-Q considered most components of health (mental, social and spiritual). Of the three instruments not validated among veterans, only the 26-item WHOQOL-BREF considered all four components of health.

CONCLUSION

We identified 45 health measurement instruments of which, among those reporting adequate psychometric properties and endorsed by our veteran partners, 2 instruments showed the most promise for measurement of subjective health. The M2C-Q, which requires augmentation to capture physical health (eg, the physical component score of the VR-36), and the WHOQOL-BREF, which requires validation among veterans.