IADR Abstract Archives
Impact on Children of Dental Caries and Treatment Under GA
Objectives: To assess the impact of dental caries and its treatment under general anaesthetic (GA) on the everyday lives of children and their families, using child-reported measures of quality of life (QoL) and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL).
Methods: Participants, aged 5-16 years old requiring treatment for caries under GA, were recruited from new patient clinics at Charles Clifford Dental Hospital, Sheffield. OHRQoL was measured before and three months after treatment using the Caries Impacts and Experiences Questionnaire for Children (CARIES-QC). Overall QoL was measured using the Child Health Utility 9D (CHU9D). Parents/caregivers completed the Family Impact Scale. Changes after treatment were analysed and tested using paired t-tests.
Results: To date, 33 parent-child dyads have completed both baseline and follow-up questionnaires. Three-quarters (76%) of children were living in the most deprived areas of England. At baseline, 53% of children said their teeth were a problem, compared to 21% after treatment. There was a statistically significant improvement in OHRQoL (mean interval score difference in CARIES-QC=5.17, t=6.78, df =32, P<0.001) and QoL (mean score difference in CHU9D=2.39, t=2.63, df=32, P<0.05) three months following treatment, but no significant change in impact on the family (p=0.218). However, 76% of parents felt their child’s dental health had much improved, and 45% noted their child’s QoL had much improved. The most common impacts reported by children were food getting stuck in teeth, having to eat on one side and their teeth causing them to cry. The main impacts on the families were being upset and feeling guilty.
Conclusions: Treatment under GA was associated with significant improvement in QoL and OHRQoL as reported by children. Structural equation modelling is required to further investigate the relationships between clinical outcomes, environmental factors, individual characteristics and quality of life outcomes guided by a theoretical model.
Methods: Participants, aged 5-16 years old requiring treatment for caries under GA, were recruited from new patient clinics at Charles Clifford Dental Hospital, Sheffield. OHRQoL was measured before and three months after treatment using the Caries Impacts and Experiences Questionnaire for Children (CARIES-QC). Overall QoL was measured using the Child Health Utility 9D (CHU9D). Parents/caregivers completed the Family Impact Scale. Changes after treatment were analysed and tested using paired t-tests.
Results: To date, 33 parent-child dyads have completed both baseline and follow-up questionnaires. Three-quarters (76%) of children were living in the most deprived areas of England. At baseline, 53% of children said their teeth were a problem, compared to 21% after treatment. There was a statistically significant improvement in OHRQoL (mean interval score difference in CARIES-QC=5.17, t=6.78, df =32, P<0.001) and QoL (mean score difference in CHU9D=2.39, t=2.63, df=32, P<0.05) three months following treatment, but no significant change in impact on the family (p=0.218). However, 76% of parents felt their child’s dental health had much improved, and 45% noted their child’s QoL had much improved. The most common impacts reported by children were food getting stuck in teeth, having to eat on one side and their teeth causing them to cry. The main impacts on the families were being upset and feeling guilty.
Conclusions: Treatment under GA was associated with significant improvement in QoL and OHRQoL as reported by children. Structural equation modelling is required to further investigate the relationships between clinical outcomes, environmental factors, individual characteristics and quality of life outcomes guided by a theoretical model.