LOGIN
 
Share Page:
Back

Volume 23 , Issue 3
May/June 2010

Pages 257–262


Reliability and Validity of the Orofacial Esthetic Scale in Prosthodontic Patients

Pernilla Larsson, DDS, PhD, Dr Odont/Mike T. John, DDS, MPH, PhD/Krister Nilner, DDS, PhD, Dr Odont/Thomas List, DDS, PhD, Dr Odont


PMID: 20552093

Purpose: This study evaluated the reliability and validity of the Orofacial Esthetic Scale (OES)—an instrument assessing self-reported orofacial esthetics in prosthodontic patients. Materials and Methods: The OES has seven items addressing direct esthetic impacts in the orofacial region, as well as an eighth global assessment item. The response format was a 0 to 10 numeric rating scale (very dissatisfied to very satisfied with appearance, respectively). OES summary scores ranged from 0 (worst score) to 70 (best score). Test-retest reliability (n = 27) and internal consistency (n = 119) were assessed. Content validation (asking patients about their satisfaction with the questionnaire content, n = 119) and discriminative validation (comparing OES scores between patients and healthy controls, n = 119) were performed. Convergent validity was assessed by correlating patients’ own OES scores (n = 29) with ratings from a consensus expert group (n = 4) and with the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) esthetic-item summary score (n = 119). Results: Test-retest reliability was excellent for the OES scores (intraclass correlation coefficient = .96). Internal consistency was satisfactory for esthetically impaired patients (n = 27, Cronbach alpha = .86). Patients rated their satisfaction with the questionnaire content as 7.8 ± 1.3 units on a 0 to 10 numeric rating scale (0 = very dissatisfied, 10 = very satisfied). OES scores discriminated esthetically impaired patients (31.4 units) from healthy controls (45.9 units, P < .001). OES scores correlated well with other measures of the same construct (r = .43 for patients’ own assessment with an assessment by experts using the OES, r = –.72 for a correlation with the OHIP’s three esthetic-related items). Conclusions: The OES, developed especially for prosthodontic patients, exhibited good score reliability and validity. Int J Prosthodont 2010;23:257–262.


Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.

 

© 2017 Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc

IJP Home
Current Issue
Ahead of Print
Archive
Author Guidelines
About
Accepted Manuscripts
Submission Form
Submit
Reprints
Permission
Advertising
Quintessence Home
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
About Us
Contact Us
Help