Validation of the Hindi version of the early childhood oral health impact scale among 3-5-year-old preschool children in Rohtak city, Haryana

BACKGROUND

The early childhood oral health impact scale (ECOHIS) has been developed for assessing oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in the preschool children and translated and validated in different languages to conform to their cultures. This tool has not been validated in Hindi for use among Indian preschool children till now. Hence, the present study was undertaken to assess the validity of the Hindi version of the ECOHIS among 3-5-year-old preschool children in Rohtak city, Haryana.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Hindi version of the ECOHIS was developed through standardized forward-backward linguistic translation method. It was tested for validity and reliability among 469 parents and their children after obtaining informed consent. Construct validity of the measure was assessed by correlating ECOHIS score to dental caries experience (deft). For internal consistency, Cronbach's alpha was determined. A subsample of the parents repeated the ratings of the measure to enable test-retest reliability assessments.

RESULTS

Construct validity was r = 0.298. Reliability of the questionnaire was 0.873 (Cronbach's alpha), and test-retest reliability as assessed by intraclass correlation value was 0.91.

CONCLUSIONS

The Hindi version of the ECOHIS is a valid instrument for assessing OHRQoL in preschool children.

Comparison of Frictional Resistance in Conventional Brackets with Different Stainless Steel Wires

AIM

The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare static and kinetic friction of round (0.018") and rectangular (0.019 × 0.025") stainless steel (SS) wires of different brands with conventional preadjusted edgewise brackets.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Maxillary canine and two bicuspids of 0.022 × 0.028" slot sized MBT prescription (Gemini, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, California) brackets were chosen. The wires selected were 0.018" SS (3M Unitek); 0.018" Australian wire (AJ Wilcock, UK), and 0.019 × 0.025" SS (3M Unitek). The testing was done on Instron 3382. A total of 30 test combinations with three wires were repeated 10 times. The static and kinetic friction was recorded in Newton. The kinetic friction was also recorded in Newton at 3, 5, 7, and 9 mm of movement. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and descriptive statistics were used for comparing the friction. To test the level of significance, multiple comparisons were used within wire in bracket by using post hoc test.

RESULTS

Static friction was found to be greater than kinetic in all wires; 0.018" SS (3M) wire exhibited minimum static and kinetic friction; while 0.019 × 0.025" SS (3M) exhibited maximum static friction. Kinetic friction was similar in both 0.018" AJ Wilcock and 0.019 × 0.025" SS but greater than 0.018" SS (3M).

CONCLUSION

Least static and kinetic friction was exhibited by 0.018" SS (3M). Kinetic friction was similar in both 0.018" AJ Wilcock and 0.019 × 0.025" SS.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The study concluded that 0.018" SS (3M) is better for individual canine retraction than the other wires used in the study because it has the least frictional resistance; 0.019 × 0.025" SS (3M) is a better wire for canine retraction than 0.018" AJ Wilcock as we can have a three-dimensional control over tooth movement. When torque control is not a prime requisite, then 0.018" SS (3M) can be used for retraction of incisors instead of 0.018" AJ Wilcock in severely proclined incisor cases.