The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 10 , ISSUE 6 ( November, 2009 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Relationship Between Patients’ Oral Health–Related Quality of Life, Satisfaction with Dentition, and Personality Profiles

Mahmoud K AL-Omiri, Firas A. M. Al Quran, Khaled Q. Al-Hamad, Jumana Karasneh

Citation Information : AL-Omiri MK, Al Quran FA, Al-Hamad KQ, Karasneh J. Relationship Between Patients’ Oral Health–Related Quality of Life, Satisfaction with Dentition, and Personality Profiles. J Contemp Dent Pract 2009; 10 (6):49-56.

DOI: 10.5005/jcdp-10-6-49

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 00-11-2009

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2009; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim

The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between patients’ oral health–related quality of life, satisfaction with their dentition, and their personality profiles.

Methods and Materials

Eighty-four patients (30 males and 54 females; mean age 31.9±12.7 years) seeking routine dental treatment were recruited for this study. A “Dental Impact on Daily Living” (DIDL) questionnaire was used to assess dental satisfaction and impact on daily living. An “Oral Health Impact Profile” (OHIP) was used to measure self-reported discomfort, disability, and dysfunction caused by oral conditions. Oral health–related quality of life was assessed using the “United Kingdom Oral Health Related Quality of Life” measure (OHQoL-U.K). A “NEO Five Factor inventory” (NEO-FFI) was used to assess personality profiles.

Results

The dentition has a measurable impact on daily living as well as with satisfaction with appearance, pain levels, oral comfort, general performance, and eating capability (p=0.000). Younger patients had more profound oral health impacts (p=0.045) and higher neuroticism scores (0.043). OHIP scores were significantly related to OHQoL-UK scores (p=0.000). DIDL scores had significant correlations with OHIP and OHQoLUK scores (p<0.05). Significant correlations were established between neuroticism and satisfaction with oral comfort, extraversion and total satisfaction and satisfaction with general performance, and openness and satisfaction with appearance (p<0.05). OHIP and OHQoLUK scores had no significant correlations with psychological profiles.

Conclusions

The status of the oral cavity can have a definitive impact on patients’ daily living and quality of life regardless age, gender, and level of education. Patients’ satisfaction with their dentition has definitive impacts on daily living, quality of life, and dental perceptions. Personality profiles (neuroticism; extraversion, and openness) may influence dental perceptions, play a significant role in shaping satisfaction with dentition, and help with the prediction of the dental impact on daily living.

Clinical Significance

Since patients’ satisfaction with their dentitions impacts their daily living and quality of life while affected by their psychological profiles, this should be considered when formulating a treatment plan for management for their dentition in order to obtain patient acceptance of the proposed treatment.

Citation

Karasneh J, Al-Omiri MK, Al-Hamad KQ, Al Quran FAM. Relationship Between Patients’ Oral Health–Related Quality of Life, Satisfaction with Dentition, and Personality Profiles. J Contemp Dent Pract [Internet]. 2009 Nov; 10(6):049-056. Available from: http://www. thejcdp.com/journal/view/volume10-issue6- karasneh.


PDF Share
  1. Clinical factors related to reported satisfaction with oral function amongst dentate older adults in England. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1997; 25(2):143–9.
  2. Dental disease and work loss. J Dent Res. 1984; 63(9):1158–61.
  3. The social impact of dental problems and visits. Am J Public Health. 1992; 82(12):1663–8.
  4. An empirical approach to developing multidimensional oral status profiles. J Public Health Dent. 1978; 38(2):148–58.
  5. Relation between clinical dental status and subjective impacts on daily living. J Dent Res. 1995; 74(7):1408–13.
  6. Social impact of oral conditions among older adults. Aust Dent J. 1994; 39(6):358–64.
  7. Understanding the value of teeth to older adults: influences on the quality of life. J Am Dent Assoc. 1993; 124(1):105–10.
  8. Oral health and the quality of life among older adults: the oral health impact profile. J Can Dent Assoc. 1993; 59(10):830-3, 837-8, 844.
  9. Developing socio-dental indicators—the social impact of dental disease. Community Dent Health. 1986; 3(1):3–17.
  10. Can a prosthesis cause psychological disturbances? J Oral Rehabil. 2001; 28(12):1133–8.
  11. Assessment of oral health related quality of life. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003; 1:40.
  12. Developing and evaluating an oral healthrelated quality of life index for children; the CHILD-OIDP. Community Dent Health. 2004; 21(2):161–9.
  13. Short forms of the Child Perceptions Questionnaire for 11–14-year-old children (CPQ11–14): development and initial evaluation. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006; 4:4.
  14. Symposium on self-reported assessments of oral health outcomes. Introduction. J Dent Educ. 1996; 60(6):485–7.
  15. Applications of self-reported assessments of oral health outcomes. J Dent Educ. 1996; 60(6):494–500.
  16. Assessing change in quality of life using the Oral Health Impact Profile. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1998; 26(1):52–61.
  17. The impact of tooth loss in a denture wearing population: an assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile. Community Dent Health. 1999; 16(3):176–80.
  18. The impact of oral health on people in the UK in 1998. Br Dent J. 2001; 190(3):121–6.
  19. Oral health-related quality of life of a population of medically compromised elderly people. Community Dent Health. 2002; 19(2):90–7.
  20. Measuring the impact of oral health on life quality in two national surveys—functionalist versus hermeneutic approaches. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2002; 30(4):254–9.
  21. Oral healthrelated quality of life in Germany. Eur J Oral Sci. 2003; 111(6):483–91.
  22. Oral and general health-related quality of life with conventional and implant dentures. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2003; 31(3):161–8.
  23. Impact of oral health on the life quality of periodontal patients. J Clin Periodontol. 2004; 31(6):454–7.
  24. How do age and tooth loss affect oral health impacts and quality of life? A study comparing two national samples. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2004; 32(2):107–14.
  25. Dimensions of oral-health-related quality of life. J Dent Res. 2004; 83(12):956–60.
  26. Pilot survey of oral health-related quality of life: a cross-sectional study of adults in Benin City, Edo State, Nigeria. BMC Oral Health. 2005; 5:7.
  27. Measuring disease. A review of disease specific quality of life measurement scales. 2nd ed. Buckingham: Open University Press; 2001.
  28. Quantifying quality. Neuro Endocrinol Lett. 1999; 20(5):263.
  29. The revised NEO Personality Inventory: Clinical and research applications. New York: Plenum Press; 1998.
  30. Counseling and related factors influencing satisfaction with dentures. J Prosthet Dent. 1978; 39(3):259–67.
  31. The use of Cattell's personality profile in patients who have had preprosthetic surgery. J Dent. 1982; 10(2):121–30.
  32. Orthodontists’ assessment and management of patient compliance. Angle Orthod. 1998; 68(2):115–22.
  33. Health financing policies. Providers’ opinions and prescribing behavior in rural China. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1999; 15(4): 686–98.
  34. Tooth wear impact on daily living [dissertation]. Belfast (Northern Ireland): Queen's University Belfast; 2002.
  35. Relationship between personality and satisfaction with the dentition in tooth wear patients. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2006; 14(4):179–84.
  36. Factors affecting patient satisfaction after orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod. 2006; 76(3):422–31.
  37. Psychological impact on implant patients’ oral health-related quality of life. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2006; 17(2):116–23.
  38. The development of measures of dental impacts on daily living [dissertation]. London: London University; 1993.
  39. Personality and satisfaction with dental implants [MSc thesis]. Jordan: Jordan University of Science and Technology; 2004.
  40. Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Florida: PAR Psychological Assessment Resources Inc; 1992.
  41. Replicable item-cluster subcomponents in the NEO Five-Factor Inventory. J Pers Assess. 1998; 70(2):263–76.
  42. The handbook of psychological testing. 2nd ed. London: Routledge; 2000.
  43. Measuring oral health: a conceptual framework. Community Dent Health. 1988; 5(1):3–18.
  44. International classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1980.
  45. Development and evaluation of the Oral Health Impact Profile. Community Dent Health. 1994; 11(1):3–11.
  46. Oral and general health-related quality of life with conventional and implant dentures. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2003; 31(3):161–8.
  47. Assessing the responsiveness of measures of oral healthrelated quality of life. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2004; 32(1):10–8.
  48. An assessment of sensitivity to change of the Oral Health Impact Profile in a clinical trial. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2001; 29(3):175–82.
  49. Derivation and validation of a shortform oral health impact profile. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1997; 25(4):284–90.
  50. Reliability and validity of two oral health related quality of life measures in Myanmar adolescents. Community Dent Health. 2004; 21(4):306–11.
  51. A cross-cultural study of oral health values. J Dent Res. 1999; 78(2):643–9.
  52. The impact of oral disease among the institutionalized and non-institutionalized elderly in Hong Kong. J Oral Rehabil. 2003; 30(1): 46–54.
  53. Spanish version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-Sp). BMC Oral Health. 2006; 6:11.
  54. Issues in measuring change in selfperceived oral health status. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1998; 26(1):41–7.
  55. A modified short version of the Oral Health Impact Profile for assessing health-related quality of life in edentulous adults. Int J Prosthodont. 2002; 15(5):446-50.
  56. Dimensions of oral health related quality of life measured by EQ-5D+ and OHIP-14. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004; 2:35.
  57. An evaluation of a new measure of oral health related quality of life—OHQoL-UK (W). Community Dent Health. 2001; 18(3):138-43.
  58. Patient-centred outcome measures in oral surgery: validity and sensitivity. Br J Oral and Maxillofac Surg. 2003; 41(1):43-7.
  59. Oral health-related quality of life in patients treated with fixed, removable, and complete denture 1 month and 6 to 12 months after treatment. Int J Prosthodont. 2004; 17(5):503-11.
  60. Symptoms of functional disturbances of the masticatory system. A comparison of frequencies in a population sample and in a group of patients. Acta Odontol Scand. 1975; 33(4):183-90.
  61. Impact of complete dentures and impaired natural dentition on masticatory performance and food choice in healthy aging men. J Prosthet Dent. 1983; 49(3):427-33.
  62. Masticatory efficiency: the effect of age, the loss of teeth and prosthetic rehabilitation. Int Dent J. 1984; 34(@):93-7.
  63. Mandibular function and dysfunction in complete denture wearers—a literature review. J Oral Rehabil. 1988; 15(3):237-49.
  64. Shortened dental arches and masticatory ability. J Dent. 1990; 18(4):185-9.
  65. Oral comfort in shortened dental arches. J Oral Rehabil. 1990; 17(2):137-43.
  66. The burden of oral disorders in a population of older adults. Community Dent Health. 1992; 9(2):109-24.
  67. Dental impacts on daily life and satisfaction with teeth in relation to dental status in adults. J Oral Rehabil. 1995; 22(7):469-80.
  68. A test for occlusal function. The value of a masticatory efficiency test in the assessment of occlusal function. Br J Orthodont. 1987; 14(2):85-90.
  69. The relationship between satisfaction with mouth and number and position of teeth. J Oral Rehabil. 1998;25(9):649–61.
  70. How much reduction of the dental arch is functionally acceptable for the ageing patient? Int Dent J. 1990; 40(3):183-8.
  71. Value of the teeth. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1990; 18(1):22-6.
  72. Lifestyle and psychosocial factors associated with tooth loss in Mexican adolescents and young adults. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2005; 6(3):70-7.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.