A Comparison of Psychometric Properties of OHIP-14 and OIDP

Objectives: to assess the reliability and construct validity of the short form of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) and the Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (OIDP). Methods: A cross sectional study was conducted and both OHIP-14 and OIDP were administered in the form of interviews. The study sample comprised 197 young women (mean age: 24 yrs, sd: 6.2) who had experienced toothache during the six months prior to the interviews. Two trained dentists performed the interviews and the oral examinations. Information regarding self-perceived general and oral health, self-perceived oral health care needs, attitudes related to the relief of the dental pain recently experienced, number of teeth, presence of dental caries and normative dental care needs was obtained. Reliability was assessed through Cronbach´s Alpha. Construct validity was evaluated based on the comparison of the median scores of the OHIP-14 and the OIDP according to the following attributes: self-perceived and normative oral health care needs (needed care or did not need care), caries lesions (at least one present or none), tooth-loss (at least one tooth missing or none), and the attitude towards the relief of toothache (something was done or waited for the pain to go away). It was also hypothesized that self-perceived general and oral health status would correlate with the total scores of both indices. Results: Cronbach´s Alphas for OHIP-14 and OIDP were 0.88 and 0.87 respectively. Differences in median scores of the groups according to the selected attributes were significant at values of p<0.01 (Mann-Whitney test), except for self-perceived dental care needs (p=0.04 and p=0.02 for OHIP-14 and OIDP respectively). Women with worst self-perceived general and oral health status obtained higher indices scores. Conclusions: OHIP-14 and OIDP presented good and similar psychometric properties. OHIP-14 showed slightly better correlation with clinical measures of oral health status.