OBJECTIVE: This study sought to assess child-caregiver concordance regarding children's oral health related quality of life (OHRQoL) using the Child Oral Health Impact Profile (COHIP). METHODS: The sample comprised treatment-seeking children aged 8-15 with pediatric (n = 141), orthodontic (n = 135), and craniofacial (n = 100) needs and their caregivers. Children and their caregivers were queried concerning the child's Oral health, Functional Well-being, Social/Emotional Well-being, School environment and Self-image. These combined subscales yielded an overall OHRQoL rating. The dyads were distributed at recruitment locations as follows: Montreal (50 pediatric, 13 orthodontic, 15 craniofacial), UMDNJ (45 pediatric, 15 orthodontic, 0 craniofacial), and NYU (46 pediatric, 107 orthodontic, 85 craniofacial). Concordance was assessed with Spearman and intraclass correlations and Kruskal-Wallis testing of categories of agreement. RESULTS: Low to modest rates of agreement between child and caregiver were found for the sample overall. Rates of concordance between child and caregiver varied between clinical groups-craniofacial patients were more likely to rate OHRQoL higher than they were to agree with their caregivers' ratings. In contrast, pediatric and orthodontic patients were more likely either agree with or rate their OHRQoL lower than their caregivers' ratings. CONCLUSION: These findings of child-caregiver concordance using the COHIP supported previous work suggesting the usefulness of obtaining both child and caregiver reports of the child's QoL.
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to assess child-caregiver concordance regarding children's oral health related quality of life (OHRQoL) using the Child Oral Health Impact Profile (COHIP). METHODS: The sample comprised treatment-seeking children aged 8-15 with pediatric (n = 141), orthodontic (n = 135), and craniofacial (n = 100) needs and their caregivers. Children and their caregivers were queried concerning the child's Oral health, Functional Well-being, Social/Emotional Well-being, School environment and Self-image. These combined subscales yielded an overall OHRQoL rating. The dyads were distributed at recruitment locations as follows: Montreal (50 pediatric, 13 orthodontic, 15 craniofacial), UMDNJ (45 pediatric, 15 orthodontic, 0 craniofacial), and NYU (46 pediatric, 107 orthodontic, 85 craniofacial). Concordance was assessed with Spearman and intraclass correlations and Kruskal-Wallis testing of categories of agreement. RESULTS: Low to modest rates of agreement between child and caregiver were found for the sample overall. Rates of concordance between child and caregiver varied between clinical groups-craniofacialpatients were more likely to rate OHRQoL higher than they were to agree with their caregivers' ratings. In contrast, pediatric and orthodontic patients were more likely either agree with or rate their OHRQoL lower than their caregivers' ratings. CONCLUSION: These findings of child-caregiver concordance using the COHIP supported previous work suggesting the usefulness of obtaining both child and caregiver reports of the child's QoL.