IADR Abstract Archives
Discriminative properties of Child Perceptions Questionnaire in Cambodian children
Objectives: To evaluate the discriminative properties of the Child Perceptions Questionnaire (CPQ) in assessing the OHRQoL of Cleft Lip and Palate (CLP) children against two other clinical groups of Cambodian children.
Methods: Three examiners were calibrated across all clinical measures (caries, malocclusion, and classification of cleft) in order to assess a convenience sample of CLP children between 8 to 14 years old attending a multidisciplinary cleft clinic in Phnom Penh. After consent was obtained, each child underwent an interview and then an intraoral examination. The interview consisted of 16 questions from CPQ11-14 which has been cross-culturally adapted and validated for 8-to 14-year old children with caries and malocclusion in a Cambodian setting. A pilot analysis was conducted to compare those in the CLP clinical group against those from historical samples of children with one or more pulpally involved teeth (PUFA group) and children with ‘great need’ of orthodontic treatment as assessed by Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (malocclusion group).
Results: A total of 259 participants were included in this analysis; 18 CLP, 109 PUFA, and 132 malocclusion participants. Those in the cleft group were more likely to have an impact reported; 66.7% compared with 35.6% of those in the malocclusion group and 56.3% of those in the PUFA group. In the CLP group, 44.4% had an impact in the emotional wellbeing subscale compared with 23.4% of those in the PUFA group and 23.0% of those in the malocclusion group.
Conclusions: The pilot analysis indicates that the CPQ may have good discriminant validity in the Cambodian context and that there is a major difference in the emotional impacts for CLP children compared with non-CLP children. A larger sample of CLP children and further analyses are required to confirm these findings.
Methods: Three examiners were calibrated across all clinical measures (caries, malocclusion, and classification of cleft) in order to assess a convenience sample of CLP children between 8 to 14 years old attending a multidisciplinary cleft clinic in Phnom Penh. After consent was obtained, each child underwent an interview and then an intraoral examination. The interview consisted of 16 questions from CPQ11-14 which has been cross-culturally adapted and validated for 8-to 14-year old children with caries and malocclusion in a Cambodian setting. A pilot analysis was conducted to compare those in the CLP clinical group against those from historical samples of children with one or more pulpally involved teeth (PUFA group) and children with ‘great need’ of orthodontic treatment as assessed by Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (malocclusion group).
Results: A total of 259 participants were included in this analysis; 18 CLP, 109 PUFA, and 132 malocclusion participants. Those in the cleft group were more likely to have an impact reported; 66.7% compared with 35.6% of those in the malocclusion group and 56.3% of those in the PUFA group. In the CLP group, 44.4% had an impact in the emotional wellbeing subscale compared with 23.4% of those in the PUFA group and 23.0% of those in the malocclusion group.
Conclusions: The pilot analysis indicates that the CPQ may have good discriminant validity in the Cambodian context and that there is a major difference in the emotional impacts for CLP children compared with non-CLP children. A larger sample of CLP children and further analyses are required to confirm these findings.