Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences
Journal of Pharmacy And Bioallied Sciences Login  | Users Online: 1514  Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
    Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions | Online submission




 
 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 12  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 210-213  

Evaluation of oral health-related quality of life in patient with removable prosthesis: A cross-sectional study


1 Department of Public Health Dentistry, Government Dental College and Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
2 Department of Prosthodontics, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences, KIIT Deemed to be University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
3 Department of Preventive Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry, Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Al-Kharj, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
4 Prosthodontic Department, College of Dentistry,Majmaah University, Al-Majmaah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
5 Department of Prosthodontics, Srinivas Institute of Dental Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka, India

Date of Submission29-Jan-2020
Date of Decision02-Feb-2020
Date of Acceptance02-Mar-2020
Date of Web Publication28-Aug-2020

Correspondence Address:
Sandhya P Naik
Department of Public Health Dentistry, Government Dental College and Hospital, St. George Hospital, P D'Mello Rd, near Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus Area, Fort, Mumbai 400001, Maharashtra
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.JPBS_63_20

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 

Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between oral health and quality of life in removable prosthesis users. Materials and Methods: An investigative cross-sectional study was designed, and 200 participants were considered based on calculations from the studies in the past. The Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP)-14 survey comprises two parts in the study. Questions related to sociodemographic factors that documented age, gender, and type of removable prosthesis were included in the initial part of survey. Questions related to impact of oral health on quality of life make up the latter part of the survey. The answers ranged from “Definitely no” to “Definitely yes” for every item on a scale having 5 points.The likely range of scores is from 14 to 70. Data were analyzed by using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software program, version 20.0 for Windows. A value of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A survey evaluating the relationship between oral health and quality of life was adequately completed by 200 participants. Of these, 18 (22%) were women and 154 (78%) were men. The parameters such as gender, age, and the relationship between oral health and quality of life did not show significant difference either within groups or between the groups. The enrolled participants were wearing different dental prostheses such as complete dentures (CDs) in both upper (U) jaw and lower (L) jaw (19%), U jaw (3%), L jaw (4%) and removable prostheses in both jaws (30%), U jaw (24%) and L jaw (20%). No statistically significant differences were seen between them. The scores for oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) were associated positively with removable prosthesis score (r = 0.122) and were statistically significant. Conclusion: This study concluded that the use of removable prosthesis may positively impact OHRQoL. The period of usage of removable dentures was the highly significant parameter affecting patient gratification, whereas the practice of using removable prostheses was the highly significant parameter affecting the relationship between oral health and quality of life.

Keywords: OHIP-14, OHRQoL, removable prosthesis, self-administered survey


How to cite this article:
Naik SP, Hota S, Bhushan P, Sam G, Kumari VV, Shetty N. Evaluation of oral health-related quality of life in patient with removable prosthesis: A cross-sectional study. J Pharm Bioall Sci 2020;12, Suppl S1:210-3

How to cite this URL:
Naik SP, Hota S, Bhushan P, Sam G, Kumari VV, Shetty N. Evaluation of oral health-related quality of life in patient with removable prosthesis: A cross-sectional study. J Pharm Bioall Sci [serial online] 2020 [cited 2020 Sep 20];12, Suppl S1:210-3. Available from: http://www.jpbsonline.org/text.asp?2020/12/5/210/292884




   Introduction Top


There has been an increase in mean age of the population with enhancement in overall health since the second part of the 20th era. There is also anticipation for the significant increase in number of the elderly population, which may sequentially increase the number of geriatric diseases. With increasing population of elderly persons, there is an undeniable need to attend this group of people so that they lead a superior quality and relaxed life.[1]

The chief component of an elderly person’s life which affects his/her lifestyle, physical, emotional, and mental happiness is oral health status. The complete social development is impacted by oral health status, which influences speech, alimentary function, and communal life.[2]

Of the several available instruments that evaluate the relationship between oral health and quality of life, Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) survey is most commonly used. The OHIP survey is designed to assess the oral condition by measuring extent of body pain and debility, emotional distress and inability, functional limitations, social disability, and handicap, all of which influence daily well-being.[3]

Although the number of non-dentulous/edentulous patients has decreased in the recent past, the progressive aging care for non-dentulous patients is much required. Complete or partial loss of teeth may arise due to various pathological or physiological factors. The most common available treatment option for non-dentulous subjects is the construction of complete or incomplete prosthesis that can be removed.[4] These dentures help in reinstating the functions of esthetics, mastication, and speech. With due consideration of various socioeconomic backgrounds, the conventional removable dentures remain the chosen option of treatment for non-dentulous patients as they are relatively cost-effective, esthetic, easier to clean, and require lesser treatment times.[5] Thus, we conducted this study to evaluate the relationship between oral health and quality of life in patients wearing removable prosthesis.


   Materials and Methods Top


Design of study

An investigative cross-sectional study was designed and conducted to evaluate the relationship between oral health and quality of life in patients wearing removable prosthesis. This study used simple random sampling method. Totally, 200 subjects were considered suitable for this trial based on previous experiences. The enrolled participants could withdraw from the investigation at any phase of study without consequences.

Survey design

The survey comprises two parts in the study. Questions related to sociodemographic factors that documented age, gender, and type of removable prosthesis were included in the initial part of survey. Questions related to impact of oral health on quality of life which was measured by OHIP-14 survey make up the latter part of the survey. The questions were both in English and Kannada language to ensure complete understanding by all participants. The answers ranged from “Definitely no” to “Definitely yes” for every item on a scale having 5 points. The likely range of scores is from 14 to 70, with higher scores suggestive of bigger neglect of oral health status. A previous pilot study was performed to establish the acceptable internal reliability (Cronbach α) of the survey as 0.80. The participants of the pilot study were not included in the final study.

Method of collection of data

An agreed permission was provided by each patient in the trial. During the study, survey forms were distributed to all the participants with ample time to answer the questions and the filled survey forms were taken back the same day. The received surveys were reviewed to assess the status of removable prosthesis.

Statistical analysis

The collected data were categorized and recorded in Excel (Microsoft Office, USA). Data were analyzed by using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, IBM SPSS, New York, USA) software program, version 20.0 for Windows. The relationship between the variables was established using analysis of variance (ANOVA), chi-square test, and Pearson correlation. A value of P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.


   Results Top


A survey evaluating the relationship between oral health and quality of life was adequately completed by 200 enrolled participants. Of these 200 participants, 18 (22%) were women and 154 (78%) were men. As shown in [Table 1] and [Table 2], parameters such as gender, age, and relationship between oral health and quality of life did not show significant difference within or between the groups.
Table 1: Comparison of age and oral health-related quality of life

Click here to view
Table 2: Comparison of gender and oral health-related quality of life

Click here to view


The participants enrolled in this study were wearing dental prosthesis as shown in [Table 3], including complete dentures (CDs) in both upper (U) jaw and lower (L) jaw (19%), U jaw (3%), L jaw (4%) and removable prostheses in both jaws (30%), U jaw (24%) and L jaw (20%). No statistically significant difference was found between them.
Table 3: Comparison of removable prosthetic status and oral health-related quality of life

Click here to view


The relationship between oral health and quality of life scores was positive for removable prosthesis score (r = 0.122) and was statistically significant, as shown in [Table 4].
Table 4: Correlation of total oral health-related quality of life scores of the subjects with removable prosthesis

Click here to view



   Discussion Top


The OHIP tool that is used in this study measured different parameters of oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) such as body pain and debility, emotional distress and inability, functional limitations, social disability, and handicap.[6] The study subjects included 200 male and female participants.

Most of the participants in our study showed the highest OHIP mean values for functional limitation and social disability. This indicates that the difficulties faced by majority of the participants were related to speech, mastication, type and taste of food, bad odor along with communication, ill-fitting dentures, and insufficient retention of dentures and social interactions.[7],[8] This denotes that although the use of removable prostheses was associated with great functional difficulty, the participants continued to use them because of lack of pain. Majority of the non-dentulous patients consider that problems associated with dentures are inseparable component of wearing a prosthesis which they have to accept and feel helpless about the same.[9] In contrast, the lowest mean value for OHIP scores was recorded for emotional distress. The findings obtained by us are like the results obtained by Kranjčić et al.[10] as per which subjects of young age from villages with lesser literacy rates and reduced denture wear time developed an increased effect on relationship between oral health and quality of life.

Cicciù et al.[11] recorded the highest score for psychological discomfort on the OHIP-14 survey in patients who were aged between 65 and 87 years. According to Ulinski et al.[12] and Kotzer et al.,[13] the parameters of the OHIP-14 surveys that were most commonly affected were psychological discomfort and physical pain in participants aged more than 60 years.

The enrolled participants were wearing different dental prostheses such as CD in both U jaw and L jaw (19%), U jaw (3%), L jaw (4%) and removable prostheses in both jaws (30%), U jaw (24%) and L jaw (20%). Our observation may have been predisposed by the factor that approximately 74% of the participants were removable partial dental prostheses wearers. A positive influence on OHRQOL cannot be warranted with restoration by removable prostheses.[14] Also, a Finland study has reported in the past that of all the adult participants, the removable prosthesis wearers with at least 20 teeth were most likely to report an impact on OHRQOL than those who did not.[15]

The most common factors that impact the OHRQoL were the denture type, experience of wearing removable prosthesis, and the patient’s contentment. The adaptation of the participant to removable prosthesis influences OHRQoL. The participants who are previous removable denture wearers will adapt more easily to dentures and enhance their OHRQoL.[16] A potentially poorer OHRQoL scores can be seen in participants who were CD wearers likened to those using partial dentures that can be removed. The OHRQoL are also influenced to a lesser extent by the type of removable denture. This result is not in accordance with the results obtained by Bae et al.,[16] in which removable prostheses users experienced reduced relationship between oral health and quality of life when linked to patients using full-mouth dentures. It could possibly be because of various processes of adjustments. Full-mouth denture wearers know their limitations completely and can perform well wearing prosthesis as he/she has switched over from incomplete to full-mouth denture in the past. On the contrary, partial denture wearers may have great anticipations and could equate prostheses to teeth in real. Conversely, Bae et al. did not find any noteworthy difference in relationship between oral health and quality of life between full-mouth prosthesis and partial prosthesis by means of impact on oral health.


   Conclusion Top


This study concluded that the use of removable prosthesis may positively impact OHRQoL. The period of usage of removable dentures was the highly significant parameter affecting patient gratification, whereas the practice of using removable prostheses was the highly significant parameter affecting the relationship between oral health and quality of life.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
   References Top

1.
Motallebnejad M, Mehdizadeh S, Najafi N, Sayyadi F The evaluation of oral health-related factors on the quality of life of the elderly in Babol. Contemp Clin Dent 2015;6:313-7.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Bortoletto A, Oliveira T A cross-sectional study of oral health-related quality of life of Piracicaba’s elderly population. Rev Odonto Ciênc 2010;25:126-31.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Slade GD, Spencer AJ Development and evaluation of the oral health impact profile. Community Dent Health 1994;11:3-11.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Prithviraj DR, Madan V, Harshamayi P, Kumar CG, Vashisht R A comparison of masticatory efficiency in conventional dentures, implant retained or supported overdentures and implant supported fixed prostheses: a literature review. J Dent Implant 2014;4:153-7.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Albaker AM The oral health-related quality of life in edentulous patients treated with conventional complete dentures. Gerodontology 2013;30:61-6.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Deeb MA, Abduljabbar T, Vohra F, Zafar MS, Hussain M Assessment of factors influencing oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of patients with removable dental prosthesis. Pak J Med Sci 2020;36:213-8.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Heydecke G, Tedesco LA, Kowalski C, Inglehart MR Complete dentures and oral health-related quality of life: Do coping styles matter? Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2004;32:297-306.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
de Souza MC, Harrison M, Marshman Z Oral health-related quality of life following dental treatment under general anaesthesia for early childhood caries: a UK-based study. Int J Paediatr Dent 2017;27:30-6.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Awad MA, Locker D, Korner-Bitensky N, Feine JS Measuring the effect of intra-oral implant rehabilitation on health-related quality of life in a randomized controlled clinical trial. J Dent Res 2000;79:1659-63.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Kranjčić J, Mikuš A, Peršić S, Vojvodić D Factors affecting oral health-related quality of life among elderly Croatian patients. Acta Stomatol Croat 2014;48:174-82.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Cicciù M, Matacena G, Signorino F, Brugaletta A, Cicciù A, Bramanti E Relationship between oral health and its impact on the quality life of Alzheimer’s disease patients: a supportive care trial. Int J Clin Exp Med 2013;6:766-72.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Ulinski KG, do Nascimento MA, Lima AM, Benetti AR, Poli-Frederico RC, Fernandes KB, et al. Factors related to oral health-related quality of life of independent Brazilian elderly. Int J Dent 2013;2013:705047.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Kotzer RD, Lawrence HP, Clovis JB, Matthews DC Oral health-related quality of life in an aging Canadian population. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2012;10:50.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Ali Z, Baker SR, Shahrbaf S, Martin N, Vettore MV Oral health-related quality of life after prosthodontic treatment for patients with partial edentulism: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2019;121:59-68.e3.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Lahti S, Suominen-Taipale L, Hausen H Oral health impacts among adults in Finland: competing effects of age, number of teeth, and removable dentures. Eur J Oral Sci 2008;116:260-6.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Bae KH, Kim C, Paik DI, Kim JB A comparison of oral health related quality of life between complete and partial removable denture-wearing older adults in Korea. J Oral Rehabil 2006;33:317-22.  Back to cited text no. 16
    



 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    Abstract
   Introduction
    Materials and Me...
   Results
   Discussion
   Conclusion
    References
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed72    
    Printed1    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded3    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal