Daniel R Reissmann1, Andreas W Benecke, Ghazal Aarabi, Ira Sierwald. 1. Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, Center for Dental and Oral Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany, d.reissmann@uke.de.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to develop the German version of the Orofacial Esthetic Scale (OES-G) and to assess its psychometric properties. METHODS: The OES is an eight-item instrument with seven items directly addressing esthetic impacts of the orofacial region and an eighth item for a global assessment. It applies an 11-point ordinal rating scale, with summary scores ranging from 0 (worst) to 70 (best). The original OES items were translated into German using a forward-backward method. A de novo development of German items (n = 21 patients) and a cross-cultural adaptation after pilot testing (n = 15 patients) established content validity. Internal consistency and construct validity (structural, convergent, known-groups) of the OES-G were assessed in a sample of 165 prosthodontic patients. The OES was applied in 42 patients on two occasions, with a temporal distance of 2-4 weeks apart to determine test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Internal consistency of the OES-G was considered as satisfactory (Cronbach's alpha 0.94; average inter-item correlation 0.64). Intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.95 (95 % confidence interval 0.92-0.98) indicated excellent test-retest reliability. Correlation matrix and exploratory factor analysis provided support for unidimensionality of the measured construct. The OES-G summary score was correlated with the patients' global assessment of their esthetics (r = 0.87) and external ratings of the expert group (r = 0.55) and discriminated patients with treatment need (39.4 points) from patients without (58.4 points; p < 0.001) and with a large effect size. CONCLUSION: The OES-G has good psychometric properties and is a valuable instrument for the assessment of self-perceived orofacial esthetics.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to develop the German version of the Orofacial Esthetic Scale (OES-G) and to assess its psychometric properties. METHODS: The OES is an eight-item instrument with seven items directly addressing esthetic impacts of the orofacial region and an eighth item for a global assessment. It applies an 11-point ordinal rating scale, with summary scores ranging from 0 (worst) to 70 (best). The original OES items were translated into German using a forward-backward method. A de novo development of German items (n = 21 patients) and a cross-cultural adaptation after pilot testing (n = 15 patients) established content validity. Internal consistency and construct validity (structural, convergent, known-groups) of the OES-G were assessed in a sample of 165 prosthodontic patients. The OES was applied in 42 patients on two occasions, with a temporal distance of 2-4 weeks apart to determine test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Internal consistency of the OES-G was considered as satisfactory (Cronbach's alpha 0.94; average inter-item correlation 0.64). Intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.95 (95 % confidence interval 0.92-0.98) indicated excellent test-retest reliability. Correlation matrix and exploratory factor analysis provided support for unidimensionality of the measured construct. The OES-G summary score was correlated with the patients' global assessment of their esthetics (r = 0.87) and external ratings of the expert group (r = 0.55) and discriminated patients with treatment need (39.4 points) from patients without (58.4 points; p < 0.001) and with a large effect size. CONCLUSION: The OES-G has good psychometric properties and is a valuable instrument for the assessment of self-perceived orofacial esthetics.
Authors: Mike T John; Pernilla Larsson; Krister Nilner; Dipankar Bandyopadhyay; Thomas List Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2012-11-19 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Edoardo Rella; Paolo De Angelis; Tiziano Nardella; Antonio D'Addona; Paolo Francesco Manicone Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2022-09-19 Impact factor: 3.606
Authors: Miguel Simancas-Pallares; Mike T John; Swati Prodduturu; William A Rush; Christopher J Enstad; Patricia Lenton Journal: J Prosthodont Res Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 4.642
Authors: Mohammed Nasser Alhajj; Zaihan Ariffin; Asja Celebić; Abdulaziz A Alkheraif; Abdullah G Amran; Ibrahim A Ismail Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-09-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Danna R Paulson; Swaha Pattanaik; Phonsuda Chanthavisouk; Mike T John Journal: Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz Date: 2021-07-09 Impact factor: 1.595
Authors: Hongzhe Dou; Yuejia Zhao; Yanhong Chen; Qingchun Zhao; Bo Xiao; Yan Wang; Yonghe Zhang; Zhiguo Chen; Jie Guo; Lingwei Tao Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2018-06-14 Impact factor: 3.295