Mapping Oral Disease Impact with a Common Metric (MOM)-Project summary and recommendations

Autor: Tanja Stamm, Katrin Bekes, Thomas List, Daniel R. Reissmann, Stella Sekulić, Ibrahim Oghli, Mike T. John, Kazuyoshi Baba, Arjen J. van Wijk, Lars Bondemark, Kenji Fueki, Nicole Theis-Mahon, Maisa Omara, Pernilla Larsson, Naichuan Su, Birgitta Häggman-Henrikson, Corine M. Visscher, Oliver Schierz
Rok vydání: 2020
Předmět:
Zdroj: John, M T, Häggman-Henrikson, B, Sekulic, S, Stamm, T, Oghli, I, Schierz, O, List, T, Baba, K, Bekes, K, van Wijk, A, Su, N, Reissmann, D R, Fueki, K, Larsson, P, Theis-Mahon, N, Omara, M, Bondemark, L & Visscher, C M 2021, ' Mapping Oral Disease Impact with a Common Metric (MOM)—Project summary and recommendations ', Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 305-307 . https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.13133
ISSN: 1365-2842
Popis: Dental patient-reported outcomes (dPROs) describe the impact of oral diseases and interventions on dental patients.1 Scores of dPRO measures (dPROMs) quantify this impact in numbers. They are necessary for evidence-based dentistry,2,3 doctor-patient communication,4 and value-based oral health care.5 Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact - the dimensions of oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) 6-8 - capture dental patients' oral health problems worldwide and regardless of whether the patient currently suffers from oral diseases or intends to prevent them in the future.9 Mapping Oral Disease Impact with a Common Metric (MOM) aims to provide four-dimensional oral health impact information using the four OHRQoL dimensions across oral diseases and settings. ADULTS: In a systematic review MOM identified four-dimensional impact information for 189 patient populations, i.e., distinct and clinically relevant groups of dental patients,10 contained in 170 publications. On average, 1.6 dental patient samples were available per population. The quality of this information was assessed and found to be predominantly good. No association between quality of information and magnitude of the patient's OHRQoL impact and no publication bias were detected. A typical functional, painful, aesthetical, and psychosocial impact (on a 0-8 impact metric based on two items with a response format 0 = never, 1 = hardly ever, 2 = occasionally, 3 = fairly often, 4 = very often) was about 2 to 3 units.11-14 CHILDREN: In a systematic review MOM identified four-dimensional impact information for 22 populations, i.e., distinct and clinically relevant groups of individuals,15 contained in 12 publications. On average, 1.2 samples were available per population. The quality of this information was assessed and found to be predominantly good. Publication bias was not assessed. A typical functional, painful, aesthetical, and psychosocial impact (on a 0-8 impact metric based on two items with a response format 0 = never, 1 = hardly ever, 2 = occasionally, 3 = fairly often, 4 = very often) was about 2 units.15.
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz: