| Literature DB >> 16934161 |
I A Kida1, A N Astrøm, G V Strand, J R Masalu, G Tsakos.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective was to study whether a Kiswahili version of the OIDP (Oral Impacts on Daily Performance) inventory was valid and reliable for use in a population of older adults in urban and rural areas of Tanzania; and to assess the area specific prevalence, intensity and perceived causes of OIDP.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2006 PMID: 16934161 PMCID: PMC1579214 DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-4-56
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes ISSN: 1477-7525 Impact factor: 3.186
Figure 1Tanzania: Kibaha and Bagamoyo districts (rural) in Pwani region and Kinondoni district (urban) in Dar es Salaam city.
The Oral Impacts on Daily Performances index (OIDP).
| During the past 6 months – how often have problems with your mouth and teeth caused you any difficulty in: | |
| a. | Eating and enjoying food |
| b. | Speaking and pronouncing clearly |
| c. | Cleaning teeth |
| d. | Sleeping and relaxing |
| e. | Smiling, laughing and showing teeth without embarrassment |
| f. | Maintaining usual emotional state without being irritable |
| g. | Carrying out major work or socio role |
| h. | Enjoying contact with people |
Classification of the intensity of oral impacts on a performance, after Gherunpong et al., 2004 [18].
| Intensity | Severity score | Frequency score | Performance score | |
| Very severe | (3) | × | (3) | 9 |
| Severe | (3) | × | (2) | 6 |
| (2) | × | (3) | ||
| Moderate | (2) | × | (2) | 4 |
| (3) | × | (1) | 3 | |
| (1) | × | (3) | ||
| Little | (2) | × | (1) | 2 |
| (1) | × | (2) | ||
| Very little | (1) | × | (1) | 1 |
| No impacts | (0) | × | (0) | 0 |
Frequency distribution of participants in urban (Kinondoni) and rural (Kibaha/Bagamoyo) districts of Tanzania according to category on independent variables (n = 1031).
| Urban | Rural | ||
| Variables | Categories (Code) | % (n) | % (n) |
| 50–59 (1) | 50.3 (257) | 37.9 (197) | |
| 60–69 (2) | 28.8 (147) | 30.0 (156) | |
| 70+ (3) | 20.9 (107) | 32.1 (167)* | |
| Male (1) | 42.7 (218) | 50.0 (260) | |
| Female (2) | 57.3 (293) | 50.0 (260)* | |
| 1st quartile-least poor | 45.4 (232) | 4.4 (23) | |
| 2nd quartile | 40.1 (205) | 8.8 (46) | |
| 3rd quartile | 11.2 (57) | 35.0 (182) | |
| 4th quartile – poorest | 3.3 (17) | 51.7 (269)* | |
| 0–1 (0) | 54.0 (276) | 44.6 (232) | |
| 2–22 (1) | 46.0 (235) | 55.4 (288)* | |
| 10 POU (1) | 12.1 (62) | 22.7 (118) | |
| 0–9 POU (2) | 87.9 (449) | 77.3 (402)* | |
| 0–1 (1) | 83.8 (428) | 77.3 (402) | |
| 2–25 (2) | 16.2 (83) | 22.7 (118)* | |
| Good (1) | 74.4 (380) | 54.4 (283) | |
| Bad (2) | 25.6 (131) | 45.6 (237)* | |
| All foods (1) | 74.8 (382) | 63.7 (331) | |
| Soft/mashed only (2) | 25.2 (129) | 36.3 (189)* | |
| 0–10 (1) | 83.2 (425) | 82.2 (427) | |
| 11–19 (2) | 11.9 (61) | 12.3 (64) | |
| 20+ (3) | 4.9 (25) | 5.6 (29) | |
* p ≤ 0.05.
The total number in the different categories did not add up to 1031 owing to missing values.
Construct and criterion validity of the OIDP-total scores: mean values for each category of grouping variable and differences in mean rank (DMR). Mann Whitney U test and Kruskal Wallis test.
| Urban (n = 508) | Rural (n = 512) | |||||
| Mean | DMR | Mean | DMR | |||
| Good | 2.1 | 3.6 | ||||
| Bad | 8.9 | 0.001 | 142.3 | 15.6 | 0.001 | 167.2 |
| All kinds | 2.5 | 5.3 | ||||
| Soft and mashed only | 7.7 | 0.001 | 100.0 | 15.7 | 0.001 | 136.2 |
| 0–1 | 2.9 | 7.5 | ||||
| 2–22 | 4.9 | 0.002 | 37.8 | 10.4 | 0.002 | 38.8 |
| 10 units | 1.4 | 6.4 | ||||
| 0–9 units | 4.2 | 0.001 | 67.1 | 9.9 | 0.001 | 51.9 |
| 0–10 | 3.6 | 8.3 | ||||
| 11–19 | 4.6 | 13.3 | ||||
| 20+ | 6.2 | 0.492 | 26.1 | 11.0 | 0.001 | 59.8 |
| 0–1 | 3.5 | 8.2 | ||||
| 2 or more | 5.3 | 0.034 | 35.0 | 12.1 | 0.001 | 57.2 |
Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% Confidence Limits (CL) for having any oral impacts on daily performance (OIDP total >0) according to clinical and non-clinical variables.
| Unadjusted | Adjusted | ||||
| %(n) | OR | 95%CI | OR | 95% CL | |
| 57.1 (257) | 1 | 1 | |||
| 60–69 | 50.7 (151) | 0.8 | 0.5–1.1 | ||
| 70+ | 58.1 (158) | 1.0 | 0.7–1.4 | 0.7 | 0.4–1.0 |
| 54.8 (258) | 1 | 1 | |||
| Female | 56.1 (308) | 1.0 | 0.8–1.3 | 0.9 | 0.6–1.2 |
| 48.8 (248) | 1 | 1 | |||
| Rural | 62.1 (318)** | 1.2 | 0.9–1.7 | ||
| 50.2 (127) | 1 | 1 | |||
| 2nd | 48.0 (120) | 0.9 | 0.6–1.2 | 0.5 | 0.5–1.1 |
| 3rd | 59.1 (139) | 1.4 | 1.0–2.0 | 0.5 | 0.5–1.1 |
| 4th most poor | 63.8 (180)** | 0.4 | 0.4–1.1 | ||
| 38.0 (249) | 1 | 1 | |||
| Bad | 86.8 (317)** | ||||
| 44.3 (313) | 1 | 1 | |||
| soft | 80.6 (253)** | ||||
| 49.5 (249) | 1 | 1 | |||
| 2–22 | 61.3 (317)** | 0.9 | 0.7–1.3 | ||
| 53.4 (449) | 1 | 1 | |||
| 11–19 | 64.0 (80) | 0.6 | 0.4–1.1 | ||
| 20+ | 68.5 (37)* | 0.6 | 0.2–1.3 | ||
| 10 | 41.0 (73) | 1 | 1 | ||
| 0–9 | 58.6 (493)** | ||||
| 52.1 (428) | 1 | 1 | |||
| 2 or more | 69.3 (138)** | 1.4 | 0.9–2.1 | ||
The total number in the different categories did not add up to 566 owing to missing values. ** p ≤ 0.001.
Internal consistency reliability of the Kiswahili version of the Oral Impacts on daily Performances (OIDP) inventory among urban and rural participants: Corrected item total Spearman's correlation and Cronbach's alpha if item deleted
| OIDP item | Urban (n = 508) | Rural (n = 512) | ||
| Corrected item total correlation | Alpha if item deleted | Corrected item total correlation | Alpha if item deleted | |
| 1. Eating | .46 | .81 | .62 | .91 |
| 2. Speaking | .54 | .77 | .70 | .89 |
| 3. Cleaning | .42 | .78 | .63 | .91 |
| 4. Sleeping | .64 | .75 | .77 | .89 |
| 5. Showing teeth | .56 | .76 | .63 | .90 |
| 6. Emotion | .64 | .75 | .82 | .89 |
| 7. Work | .51 | .77 | .78 | .89 |
| 8. Social contact | .59 | .77 | .79 | .89 |
| Standardised Cronbach's Alpha | 0.83 | 0.90 | ||
Prevalence (% OIDP SC >0), mean OIDP total impact scores and intensity (% of adults with oral impacts) of older Tanzanians in urban areas (n = 508)
| Overall | Eating | Speaking | Cleaning | Sleeping | Smiling | Emotion | Work | Contact | |
| (n = 508) | (n = 511) | (n = 508) | (n = 511) | (n = 511) | (n = 511) | (n = 511) | (n = 511) | (n = 511) | |
| OIDP prevalence % | 51.2 | 42.5 | 9.1 | 18.2 | 12.1 | 8.4 | 17.4 | 7.6 | 5.9 |
| OIDP impact score: | |||||||||
| 0–40 | 0–9 | 0–6 | 0–9 | 0–6 | 0–9 | 0–9 | 0–6 | 0–6 | |
| 3.8 (6.5) | 1.4 (2.1) | 0.3 (1.0) | 0.5 (1.4) | 0.4 (1.1) | 0.3 (1.3) | 0.5 (1.3) | 0.2 (0.9) | 0.2 (0.8) | |
| Impact intensity a | |||||||||
| 11.2 | 11.5 | 8.7 | 30.1 | 11.3 | 14.0 | 14.6 | 12.8 | 26.7 | |
| 22.0 | 31.8 | 43.5 | 29.0 | 19.4 | 25.6 | 38.2 | 30.8 | 26.7 | |
| 58.4 | 38.7 | 37.0 | 30.1 | 62.9 | 39.5 | 38.2 | 53.8 | 36.7 | |
| 8.4 | 12.0 | 10.9 | 6.5 | 6.5 | 7.0 | 7.9 | 2.6 | 10.0 | |
| 0.0 | 6.0 | 0.0 | 4.3 | 0.0 | 14.0 | 1.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |
a Impact intensity:% of adults with impact.
Prevalence (% OIDP SC >0), mean OIDP-total impact score-, and impact intensity scores (% of adults with impacts) of older Tanzanians in rural areas (n = 512)
| Overall | Eating | Speaking | Cleaning | Sleeping | Smiling | Emotion | Work | Contact | |
| (n = 512) | (n = 519) | (n = 514) | (n = 520) | (n = 519) | (n = 520) | (n = 520) | (n = 520) | (n = 520) | |
| OIDP prevalence % | 62.1 | 55.1 | 20.8 | 30.6 | 27.0 | 15.6 | 30.4 | 22.5 | 21.7 |
| OIDP impact score: | |||||||||
| 0–72 | 0–9 | 0–9 | 0–9 | 0–9 | 0–9 | 0–9 | 0–9 | 0–9 | |
| 9.1 (13.3) | 2.1 (2.6) | 0.9 (1.9) | 1.3 (2.3) | 1.1 (2.1) | 0.6 (1.7) | 1.2 (2.2) | 0.9 (1.9) | 0.9 (1.9) | |
| Impact intensitya | |||||||||
| 11.9 | 18.1 | 11.2 | 12.6 | 7.9 | 11.1 | 14.6 | 7.7 | 7.1 | |
| 15.8 | 18.4 | 12.1 | 13.8 | 17.1 | 13.6 | 19.6 | 21.4 | 21.2 | |
| 60.7 | 32.6 | 40.2 | 35.8 | 50.0 | 50.6 | 36.7 | 47.9 | 43.4 | |
| 11.8 | 22.2 | 29.9 | 27.7 | 18.6 | 16.0 | 19.6 | 15.4 | 22.1 | |
| 0.0 | 8.7 | 6.5 | 10.1 | 6.4 | 8.6 | 9.5 | 7.7 | 6.2 | |
a Impact intensity:% of adults with impact.
Figure 2Percentage of the main oral problems causing an impact on the eight performances according to place of residence.