EVALUATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ORTHODONTIC TREATMENT NEED AND ORAL HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE OF 11-15 YEAR OLD CHILDREN WITH DIFFERENT MALOCCLUSIONS: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY

Abstract

ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this cross-sectional study is to determine the orthodontic treatment need and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in children aged 11-15 and to evaluate the effect of orthodontic treatment need on oral health-related quality of life in different malocclusion groups. Individuals and Methods: 261 children (158 girls, 103 boys) aged 11-15 years (mean 13.03±1.93 years in girls, 12.66±1.75 years in boys) who deserved orthodontic treatment constituted the material of the study. Individuals were divided into 3 groups according to their dental malocclusions as Angle Class I, Class II and Class III. Data collection tools; Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN) Dental Health Component (IOTN-DHC), IOTN Aesthetic Component (IOTN-AC), Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) and Clinical Examination Data Form. OHIP-14 was used to measure OHRQoL. IOTN-DHC and IOTN-AC (orthodontist & self-perception) were used to determine the need for orthodontic treatment. Data were collected through questionnaires, personal interviews, and intraoral examinations. Mann Whitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis test and Kendall tau-b correlation test were used to evaluate the data and the significance level was determined as P<0.05. Results: It was determined that there was no difference between the genders in terms of OHIP-14, IOTN-DHC and IOTN-AC variables (P>0.05). While there was no significant difference between malocclusion groups in terms of OHIP-14 scores, IOTN-DHC scores indicating the need for orthodontic treatment were found to be significantly higher in the Class III malocclusion group (P<0.005). The IOTN-AC (self-perception) scores, in which children with Class II malocclusion evaluated their dental status according to their own aesthetic perceptions, were found to be significantly higher. While IOTN-DHC and IOTN-AC scores were highly correlated in all malocclusion groups, the correlation between IOTN scores and OHIP-14 scores was not statistically significant. Conclusion: The need for orthodontic treatment determined in different malocclusion groups may not affect the OHRQoL of the patients. In children aged 11-15 years, OHRQoL indices may be helpful in determining treatment priority as an adjunct to traditional diagnostic methods.

Keywords

• Malocclusion
• Oral Health-Related Quality of Life
• Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need
• OHIP-14
• Child.

11-15 YAŞ ARASI FARKLI MALOKLUZYONLARA SAHİP ÇOCUKLARDA ORTODONTİK TEDAVİ İHTİYACI VE AĞIZ SAĞLIĞINA İLİŞKİN YAŞAM KALİTESİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİNİN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ: KESİTSEL BİR ÇALIŞMA

Abstract

ÖZ Amaç: Bu kesitsel çalışmanın amacı 11-15 yaş arası çocuklarda ortodontik tedavi ihtiyacının ve ağız sağlığı ile ilgili yaşam kalitesinin (OHRQoL) belirlenmesi ve farklı malokluzyon gruplarında ortodontik tedavi ihtiyacının, OHRQoL üzerindeki etkisinin değerlendirilmesidir. Bireyler ve Yöntem: Ortodontik tedavi görme isteği bulunan 11-15 yaş arası (kızlarda ort. 13.03 ± 1.93 yıl, erkeklerde ort. 12.66 ± 1.75 yıl) 261 çocuk (158 kız, 103 erkek) çalışmanın gerecini oluşturmuştur. Bireyler dental malokluzyonlarına göre Angle Sınıf I, Sınıf II ve Sınıf III olarak 3 gruba ayrıldı. Veri toplama araçları; Ortodontik Tedavi İhtiyacı Diş Sağlığı Bileşeni indeksi (IOTN-DHC), IOTN Estetik Bileşeni indeksi (IOTN-AC), Ağız sağlığı etki profili (Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14)) ve Klinik Muayene Veri Formudur. OHRQoL'yi ölçmek için OHIP-14 kullanıldı. IOTN-DHC ve IOTN-AC (ortodontist & kendi algısı) ise ortodontik tedavi gereksinimini belirlemek amacıyla kullanıldı. Veriler anketler, kişisel görüşmeler ve intraoral muayeneler yoluyla toplandı. Verilerin değerlendirilmesinde Mann Whitney U testi, Kruskal-Wallis testi ve Kendall tau-b korelasyon testi kullanıldı ve anlamlılık düzeyi P<0.05 olarak belirlendi. Bulgular: Cinsiyetler arasında OHIP-14, IOTN-DHC ve IOTN-AC değişkenleri açısından farklılık bulunmadığı belirlendi (P>0.05). Malokluzyon grupları arasında OHRQoL ölçme verisi olan OHIP-14 skorları açısından anlamlı farklılık bulunmazken ortodontik tedavi gereksinimini belirten IOTN-DHC skorları Sınıf III malokluzyon grubunda anlamlı derecede yüksek olduğu bulundu (P<0.005). Sınıf II malokluzyona sahip çocukların dental durumlarını kendi estetik algılarına göre değerlendirdikleri IOTN-AC (kendi algısı) skorları ise anlamlı derecede yüksek bulundu. Tüm malokluzyon gruplarında IOTN-DHC ve IOTN-AC skorları yüksek korelasyon gösterirken, IOTN skorları ve OHIP-14 skorları arasındaki korelasyon istatistiksel olarak anlamlı değildi. Sonuç: Farklı malokluzyon gruplarında belirlenen ortodontik tedavi ihtiyacı, hastaların OHRQoL'sini etkilemeyebilir. 11-15 yaş arası çocuklarda OHRQoL indeksleri geleneksel teşhis metotlarına yardımcı olarak tedavi önceliğinin belirlenmesinde faydalı olabilir.

Keywords

• Malokluzyon
• Ağız Sağlığı ile İlişkili Yaşam Kalitesi
• Ortodontik Tedavi Gereksinim İndeksi
• OHIP-14
• Çocuk.

References

1. 1. OHCHR; WHO. The Right to Health. Fact Sheet No. 31; United Nations Press: Geneva, Switzerland, 2008.
2. 2. Mandava P, Singaraju GS, Obili S, Nettam V, Vatturu S, Erugu S. Impact of self-esteem on the relationship between orthodontic treatment and the oral health-related quality of life in patients after orthodontic treatment - a systematic review. Med Pharm Rep. 2021;94(2):158-169.
3. 3. Gift HC, Atchison KA. Oral health, health, and health‑related quality of life. Med Care. 1995;33(11 Suppl):NS57‑NS77.
4. 4. Thomson WM, Broder HL. Oral-Health-Related Quality of Life in Children and Adolescents. Pediatr Clin North Am. 2018;65(5):1073-1084.
5. 5. Gabardo MC, Moysés ST, Moysés SJ. Self-rating of oral health according to the Oral Health Impact Profile and associated factors: a systematic review. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2013;33(6):439-45.
6. 6. Alvarez-Azaustre MP, Greco R, Llena C. Oral Health-Related Quality of Life in Adolescents as Measured with the Child-OIDP Questionnaire: A Systematic Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(24):12995.
7. 7. Basol ME, Karaagaçlioglu L, Yilmaz B. Türkçe Agiz Sagligi Etki Ölçeginin Gelistirilmesi-OHIP-14-TR/Developing a Turkish Oral Health Impact Profile-OHIP-14-TR. Turkiye Klinikleri Dishekimligi Bilimleri Dergisi, 2014;20(2), 85.
8. 8. Bennadi D, Reddy CV. Oral health related quality of life. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2013;3(1):1-6.

9. 9. John MT, Patrick DL, Slade GD. The German version of Oral Health Impact Profile: translation and psychometric properties. Eur J Oral Sci 2002;110(6):425-33.
10. 10. Slade GD, Spencer AJ. Development and evaluation of the Oral Health Impact Profile. Community Dent Health 1994;11(1):3-11.
11. 11. Van der Geld P, Oosterveld P, Van Heck G, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. Smile attractiveness. Self-perception and influence on personality. Angle Orthod. 2007;77(5):759-65.
12. 12. Aldrigui JM, Abanto J, Carvalho TS, Mendes FM, Wanderley MT, Bonecker M, Raggio DP. Impact of traumatic dental injuries and malocclusions on quality of life of young children. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2011;9:78.
13. 13. Barbosa TS, Gaviao MB. Oral health-related quality of life in children: part II. Effects of clinical oral health status; a systematic review. Int J Dent Hyg. 2008;6(2):100–7.
14. 14. Baskaradoss JK, Geevarghese A, Alsaadi W, Alemam H, Alghaihab A, Almutairi AS, Almthen A. The impact of malocclusion on the oral health related quality of life of 11-14-year-old children. BMC Pediatr. 2022 Feb 14;22(1):91.
15. 15. Thilander B, Pena L, Infante C, Parada SS, de Mayorga C. Prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need in children and adolescents in Bogota, Colombia. An epidemiological study related to different stages of dental development. Eur J Orthod. 2001;23(2):153-67.
16. 16. Ovsenik M. Assessment of malocclusion in the permanent dentition: reliability of intraoral measurements. Eur J Orthod. 2007;29(6):654-9.
17. 17. Brook PH, Shaw WC. The development of an index of orthodontic treatment priority. Eur J Orthod. 1989;11(3):309-20.
18. 18. Grzywacz I. The value of the aesthetic component of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need in the assessment of subjective orthodontic treatment need. Eur J Orthod. 2003;25(1):57-63.
19. 19. Kolawole KA, Otuyemi OD, Oluwadaisi AM. Assessment of oral health related quality of life in Nigerian children using the Child Perceptions Questionnaire (CPQ 11–14). Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2011;12(1):55–9.24.
20. 20. Barbosa TS, Tureli MC, Gaviao MB. Validity and reliability of the Child Perceptions Questionnaires applied in Brazilian children. BMC Oral Health. 2009;9:13.
21. 21. Dawoodbhoy I, Delgado-Angulo EK, Bernabe E. Impact of malocclusion on the quality of life of Saudi children. Angle Orthod. 2013;83(6):1043–8.
22. 22. Agou S, Locker D, Streiner DL, Tompson B. Impact of self-esteem on the oral-health-related quality of life of children with malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008;134(4):484–489.
23. 23. Dos Santos PR, Meneghim MdC, Ambrosano GM, Vedovello Filho M, Vedovello SA. Influence of quality of life, self-perception, and selfesteem on orthodontic treatment need. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2017;151:143-147.
24. 24. Slade GD. Derivation and validation of a short‐form oral health impact profile. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1997;25(4): 284-290.
25. 25. Evans R, Shaw W. Preliminary evaluation of an illustrated scale for rating dental attractiveness. Eur J Orthod. 1987;9(4):314-8.
26. 26. Yetkiner E, Vardar C, Ergin E, Yucel, C. Orthodontic treatment need, self-esteem, and oral health-related quality of life assessment of primary schoolchildren: a cross-sectional pilot study. Turkish J Orthod. 2014; Vol, 26(4):182-9.
27. 27. Pacheco-Pereira C, Brandelli J, Flores-Mir C. Patient satisfaction and quality of life changes after Invisalign treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2018;153(6):834-841.
28. 28. Aljughaiman A, Alshammari A, Althumairi A, et al. Patient satisfaction with orthodontic treatment received in public and private hospitals in Dammam, Saudi Arabia. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2018;6(8):1492-1497.
29. 29. de Paula Junior DF, Santos NC, da Silva ET, Nunes MF, Leles CR. Psychosocial impact of dental esthetics on quality of life in adolescents. Angle Orthod. 2009;79(6):1188–93.
30. 30. Tessarollo FR, Feldens CA, Closs LQ. The impact of malocclusion on adolescents’ dissatisfaction with dental appearance and oral functions. Angle Orthod. 2012;82(3):403–9.
31. 31. Çoban Büyükbayraktar Z, Doruk C. Dental anxiety and fear levels, patient satisfaction, and quality of life in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment: Is there a relationship? Turk J Orthod. 2021; 34(4): 234-241.
32. 32. Marques LS, Filogoˆ nio CA, Filogoˆ nio CB, Pereira LJ, Pordeus IA, Paiva SM, Ramos-Jorge ML. Aesthetic impact of malocclusion in the daily living of Brazilian adolescents. J Orthod. 2009;36:152–159.
33. 33. Soh J, Chew MT, Chan YH. Perceptions of dental esthetics of Asian orthodontists and laypersons. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;130:170–176.