Utility of two oral health‐related quality‐of‐life measures in patients with xerostomia

Abstract

The study compared the validity of the short form of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) and Oral Impacts on Daily Performance (OIDP) as measures of oral health-related quality of life in patients with xerostomia in the UK. A cross-sectional comparison of OHIP14 and OIDP with measures of clinical indicators, xerostomia symptom status, speech function, global oral health ratings and psychological well-being, in 85 patients attending outpatient clinics. Both OHIP14 and OIDP had excellent internal reliability, and good criterion and construct validity when used in this population of xerostomia patients. In regression analyses, salivary gland condition and xerostomia symptom status significantly predicted oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), accounting for 29% and 14% of the variance in OHIP and OIDP scores respectively. In turn, OHRQoL predicted global ratings of oral health (26% of variance) and psychological well-being (depression) scores (15%). Sex, ethnicity and age were associated with clinical presentation and patient-reported symptoms. Clinical presentation, OHRQoL (as measured by the OIDP) and speech function were related to duration of symptoms. Both OHIP14 and OIDP have good psychometric properties and appear useful measures of OHRQoL in xerostomia. Overall, the OHIP14 performed better than did OIDP. For both measures, the additive scoring method may be more relevant for this population that the number of impacts.