OBJECTIVES: The Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale (ECOHIS) is a recently developed oral health-related quality of life instrument designed to assess the impact of oral health problems in 0-5-year-old children. It has previously been validated as discriminative instrument. The goal of this study was to investigate the responsiveness to change of the ECOHIS. METHODS: Data were collected from a convenience sample of 101 parents of 0-5-year-old children attending a hospital dental clinic for dental treatment. The ECOHIS was completed by parents prior to dental treatment and 2 weeks later. Subjects were also asked a global transition judgement concerning change between the second and first completion of the ECOHIS instrument. Responsiveness to change of the ECOHIS was analysed through: (i) a comparison of ECOHIS change scores with a global transition judgment by study subjects; (ii) an assessment of the statistical significance of within-group change in scores over time for groups reporting improvement, stability and deterioration; (iii) an estimation of the ECOHIS's sensitivity; and (iv) an investigation the effect size of the ECOHIS. RESULTS: Of the 101 subjects recruited, 94 had full datasets. Their data were used for the analyses reported in this paper. Pre- and post-treatment distributions of ECOHIS scores were strongly distributed towards no oral health impacts. Among the 94 subjects, 51.1% reported improvement, 42.6% reported no change and 6.4% reported deterioration following treatment, using the global transition judgement. The mean ECOHIS change scores for these three groups were -0/9, +0.7 and +6.5 respectively, although none of the within-group changes were statistically significant. The effect size for those reporting improvement was small (0.15) but for those reporting deterioration was moderate-to-large (0.69). Sensitivity ranged from 0.61-0.79 depending on the size of the cut-off point, with a change of 3 points demonstrating the best sensitivity to false positive ratio (0.79 versus 0.41 respectively). CONCLUSION: In this sample with low levels of problems, the ECOHIS has demonstrated some limited ability to respond to change. Further work in a larger sample with higher levels of problems is needed to investigate the instrument's ability to respond to change when it has occurred.
OBJECTIVES: The Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale (ECOHIS) is a recently developed oral health-related quality of life instrument designed to assess the impact of oral health problems in 0-5-year-old children. It has previously been validated as discriminative instrument. The goal of this study was to investigate the responsiveness to change of the ECOHIS. METHODS: Data were collected from a convenience sample of 101 parents of 0-5-year-old children attending a hospital dental clinic for dental treatment. The ECOHIS was completed by parents prior to dental treatment and 2 weeks later. Subjects were also asked a global transition judgement concerning change between the second and first completion of the ECOHIS instrument. Responsiveness to change of the ECOHIS was analysed through: (i) a comparison of ECOHIS change scores with a global transition judgment by study subjects; (ii) an assessment of the statistical significance of within-group change in scores over time for groups reporting improvement, stability and deterioration; (iii) an estimation of the ECOHIS's sensitivity; and (iv) an investigation the effect size of the ECOHIS. RESULTS: Of the 101 subjects recruited, 94 had full datasets. Their data were used for the analyses reported in this paper. Pre- and post-treatment distributions of ECOHIS scores were strongly distributed towards no oral health impacts. Among the 94 subjects, 51.1% reported improvement, 42.6% reported no change and 6.4% reported deterioration following treatment, using the global transition judgement. The mean ECOHIS change scores for these three groups were -0/9, +0.7 and +6.5 respectively, although none of the within-group changes were statistically significant. The effect size for those reporting improvement was small (0.15) but for those reporting deterioration was moderate-to-large (0.69). Sensitivity ranged from 0.61-0.79 depending on the size of the cut-off point, with a change of 3 points demonstrating the best sensitivity to false positive ratio (0.79 versus 0.41 respectively). CONCLUSION: In this sample with low levels of problems, the ECOHIS has demonstrated some limited ability to respond to change. Further work in a larger sample with higher levels of problems is needed to investigate the instrument's ability to respond to change when it has occurred.
Authors: Seyed-Ebrahim Jabarifar; Ali Golkari; Mohammad H Ijadi; Mehdi Jafarzadeh; Parvin Khadem Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2010-04-06 Impact factor: 2.757
Authors: Taís S Barbosa; Marina S Leme; Paula M Castelo; Maria Beatriz D Gavião Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2011-05-12 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: William M Thomson; Lyndie A Foster Page; Penelope E Malden; Wanda N Gaynor; Norhasnida Nordin Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2014-03-11 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Abeer M Al-Nowaiser; Abdulaziz S Al Suwyed; Khalid H Al Zoman; Asirvatham A Robert; Tarfa Al Brahim; Sebastian G Ciancio; Sultan A Al Mubarak; Omar A El Meligy Journal: Clin Exp Dent Res Date: 2017-09-08