Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Clinical Oral Investigations 8/2015

01.11.2015 | Original Article

Effects of method of administration on oral health-related quality of life assessment using the Child Perceptions Questionnaire (CPQ-G11–14)

verfasst von: Sandra Malter, Christian Hirsch, Daniel R. Reissmann, Oliver Schierz, Katrin Bekes

Erschienen in: Clinical Oral Investigations | Ausgabe 8/2015

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

Questionnaires that measure oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in children and adolescents have emerged in recent years as an important source of patient-reported outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate potential effects of the method of administration (face-to-face interview, telephone interview, or self-administered questionnaire) in 11- to 14-year-old children and adolescents on OHRQoL information obtained using the Child Perceptions Questionnaire (CPQ).

Materials and methods

OHRQoL was measured using the German version of the CPQ (CPQ-G11–14). The instrument was administered to 42 children and adolescents aged 11 to 14 years using the three different methods in a randomized order with an interval of 1 week between each administration. Test–retest reliability for the repeated CPQ-G11–14 assessments across the three methods of administration, internal consistency, and convergent validity were determined.

Results

The CPQ-G11–14 mean summary scores did not vary statistically significantly across the three administration methods (P = 0.274). Test–retest reliability was moderate to good (ICC 0.69–0.82), internal consistency was satisfactory (Cronbach’s alpha 0.85–0.88), and CPQ-G11–14 mean summary scores were correlated in the expected direction with a global measure of self-reported oral health for all the three administration methods.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the method of administration (face-to-face interview, telephone interview, or self-administered questionnaire) did not influence CPQ-G11-14 scores in 11- to 14-year-old children and adolescents to a significant extent.

Clinical relevance

Investigators in German-speaking countries can choose between all three methods of administration to obtain valid and reliable OHRQoL information.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Inglehart M, Bagramian R (2002) Oral health related quality of life: an introduction. In: Inglehart M, Bagramian R (eds) Oral health-related quality of life. Quintessence, Chicago, pp 13–28 Inglehart M, Bagramian R (2002) Oral health related quality of life: an introduction. In: Inglehart M, Bagramian R (eds) Oral health-related quality of life. Quintessence, Chicago, pp 13–28
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Jokovic A, Locker D, Stephens M, Kenny D, Tompson B, Guyatt G (2002) Validity and reliability of a questionnaire for measuring child oral-health-related quality of life. J Dent Res 81:459–463CrossRefPubMed Jokovic A, Locker D, Stephens M, Kenny D, Tompson B, Guyatt G (2002) Validity and reliability of a questionnaire for measuring child oral-health-related quality of life. J Dent Res 81:459–463CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Bekes K, John MT, Zyriax R, Schaller HG, Hirsch C (2012) The German version of the Child Perceptions Questionnaire (CPQ-G11-14): translation process, reliability, and validity in the general population. Clin Oral Investig 16:165–171CrossRefPubMed Bekes K, John MT, Zyriax R, Schaller HG, Hirsch C (2012) The German version of the Child Perceptions Questionnaire (CPQ-G11-14): translation process, reliability, and validity in the general population. Clin Oral Investig 16:165–171CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Hawthorne G (2003) The effect of different methods of collecting data: mail, telephone and filter data collection issues in utility measurement. Qual Life Res 12:1081–1088CrossRefPubMed Hawthorne G (2003) The effect of different methods of collecting data: mail, telephone and filter data collection issues in utility measurement. Qual Life Res 12:1081–1088CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Fayers P, Machin D (2007) Quality of life—the assessment, analysis and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes. Wiley, Chichester Fayers P, Machin D (2007) Quality of life—the assessment, analysis and interpretation of patient-reported outcomes. Wiley, Chichester
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Reissmann DR, John MT, Schierz O (2011) Influence of administration method on oral health-related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile. Eur J Oral Sci 119:73–78CrossRefPubMed Reissmann DR, John MT, Schierz O (2011) Influence of administration method on oral health-related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile. Eur J Oral Sci 119:73–78CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Jones D, Kazis L, Lee A, Rogers W, Skinner K, Cassar L, Wilson N, Hendricks A (2001) Health status assessments using the Veterans SF-12 and SF-36: methods for evaluating otucomes in the Veterans Health Administration. J Ambul Care Manag 24:68–86CrossRef Jones D, Kazis L, Lee A, Rogers W, Skinner K, Cassar L, Wilson N, Hendricks A (2001) Health status assessments using the Veterans SF-12 and SF-36: methods for evaluating otucomes in the Veterans Health Administration. J Ambul Care Manag 24:68–86CrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat de Sousa PCB, Mendes FM, Imparato JCP, Ardenghi TM (2009) Differences in responses to the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP14) used as a questionnaire or in an interview. Braz Oral Res 23:358–364CrossRefPubMed de Sousa PCB, Mendes FM, Imparato JCP, Ardenghi TM (2009) Differences in responses to the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP14) used as a questionnaire or in an interview. Braz Oral Res 23:358–364CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Hays RD, Bell RM, Gillogly JJ, Hill L, Giroux D, Davis C, Lewis MW, Damush TM, Nicholas R (1997) Impact of response options and feedback about response inconsistencies on alcohol use self-reports by microcomputer. J Alcohol Drug Educ 42:1–18 Hays RD, Bell RM, Gillogly JJ, Hill L, Giroux D, Davis C, Lewis MW, Damush TM, Nicholas R (1997) Impact of response options and feedback about response inconsistencies on alcohol use self-reports by microcomputer. J Alcohol Drug Educ 42:1–18
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Robinson PG, Gibson B, Khan FA, Birnbaum W (2001) A comparison of OHIP 14 and OIDP as interviews and questionnaires. Community Dent Health 18:144–149PubMed Robinson PG, Gibson B, Khan FA, Birnbaum W (2001) A comparison of OHIP 14 and OIDP as interviews and questionnaires. Community Dent Health 18:144–149PubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Medical Outcome Trust (2002) Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 11:193–205CrossRef Medical Outcome Trust (2002) Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 11:193–205CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Malden PE, Thomson WM, Jokovic A, Locker D (2008) Changes in parent-assessed oral health-related quality of life among young children following dental treatment under general anaesthetic. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 36:108–117CrossRefPubMed Malden PE, Thomson WM, Jokovic A, Locker D (2008) Changes in parent-assessed oral health-related quality of life among young children following dental treatment under general anaesthetic. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 36:108–117CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310CrossRefPubMed Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Shrout PE, Fleiss JL (1979) Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 86:420–428CrossRefPubMed Shrout PE, Fleiss JL (1979) Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 86:420–428CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Schuck P (2004) Assessing reproducibility for interval data in health-related quality of life questionnaires: which coefficient should be used? Qual Life Res 13:571–586CrossRefPubMed Schuck P (2004) Assessing reproducibility for interval data in health-related quality of life questionnaires: which coefficient should be used? Qual Life Res 13:571–586CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Nunnally JC, Bernstein IR (1994) Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, New York Nunnally JC, Bernstein IR (1994) Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, New York
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16:297–334CrossRef Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16:297–334CrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Streiner D, Norman G (2003) Bias in responding. In: Streiner D, Norman G (eds) Health measurement scales. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 228–247 Streiner D, Norman G (2003) Bias in responding. In: Streiner D, Norman G (eds) Health measurement scales. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 228–247
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH (1989) Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 10:407–415CrossRefPubMed Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH (1989) Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 10:407–415CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Bekes K, John MT, Schaller HG, Hirsch C (2011) The German version of the child perceptions questionnaire on oral health-related quality of life (CPQ-G11-14): population-based norm values. J Orofac Orthop 72:223–233CrossRefPubMed Bekes K, John MT, Schaller HG, Hirsch C (2011) The German version of the child perceptions questionnaire on oral health-related quality of life (CPQ-G11-14): population-based norm values. J Orofac Orthop 72:223–233CrossRefPubMed
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Ramos-Jorge ML, Vieira-Andrade RG, Martins-Junior PA, Cordeiro MM, Ramos-Jorge J, Paiva SM, Marques LS (2011) Level of agreement between self-administered and interviewer-administered CPQ8-10 and CPQ11-14. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 40:201–209CrossRefPubMed Ramos-Jorge ML, Vieira-Andrade RG, Martins-Junior PA, Cordeiro MM, Ramos-Jorge J, Paiva SM, Marques LS (2011) Level of agreement between self-administered and interviewer-administered CPQ8-10 and CPQ11-14. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 40:201–209CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Marx RG, Menezes A, Horovitz L, Jones EC, Warren RF (2003) A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments. J Clin Epidemiol 56:730–735CrossRefPubMed Marx RG, Menezes A, Horovitz L, Jones EC, Warren RF (2003) A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments. J Clin Epidemiol 56:730–735CrossRefPubMed
24.
Zurück zum Zitat O'Toole BI, Battistutta D, Long A, Crouch K (1986) A comparison of costs and data quality of three health survey methods: mail, telephone and personal home interview. Am J Epidemiol 124:317–328PubMed O'Toole BI, Battistutta D, Long A, Crouch K (1986) A comparison of costs and data quality of three health survey methods: mail, telephone and personal home interview. Am J Epidemiol 124:317–328PubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat McHorney CA, Kosinski M, Ware JE Jr (1994) Comparisons of the costs and quality of norms for the SF-36 health survey collected by mail versus telephone interview: results from a national survey. Med Care 32:551–567CrossRefPubMed McHorney CA, Kosinski M, Ware JE Jr (1994) Comparisons of the costs and quality of norms for the SF-36 health survey collected by mail versus telephone interview: results from a national survey. Med Care 32:551–567CrossRefPubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Lyons RA, Wareham K, Lucas M, Price D, Williams J, Hutchings HA (1999) SF-36 scores vary by method of administration: implications for study design. J Public Health Med 21:41–45CrossRefPubMed Lyons RA, Wareham K, Lucas M, Price D, Williams J, Hutchings HA (1999) SF-36 scores vary by method of administration: implications for study design. J Public Health Med 21:41–45CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Effects of method of administration on oral health-related quality of life assessment using the Child Perceptions Questionnaire (CPQ-G11–14)
verfasst von
Sandra Malter
Christian Hirsch
Daniel R. Reissmann
Oliver Schierz
Katrin Bekes
Publikationsdatum
01.11.2015
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Clinical Oral Investigations / Ausgabe 8/2015
Print ISSN: 1432-6981
Elektronische ISSN: 1436-3771
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1434-3

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 8/2015

Clinical Oral Investigations 8/2015 Zur Ausgabe

Darf man die Behandlung eines Neonazis ablehnen?

08.05.2024 Gesellschaft Nachrichten

In einer Leseranfrage in der Zeitschrift Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology möchte ein anonymer Dermatologe bzw. eine anonyme Dermatologin wissen, ob er oder sie einen Patienten behandeln muss, der eine rassistische Tätowierung trägt.

Ein Drittel der jungen Ärztinnen und Ärzte erwägt abzuwandern

07.05.2024 Klinik aktuell Nachrichten

Extreme Arbeitsverdichtung und kaum Supervision: Dr. Andrea Martini, Sprecherin des Bündnisses Junge Ärztinnen und Ärzte (BJÄ) über den Frust des ärztlichen Nachwuchses und die Vorteile des Rucksack-Modells.

Endlich: Zi zeigt, mit welchen PVS Praxen zufrieden sind

IT für Ärzte Nachrichten

Darauf haben viele Praxen gewartet: Das Zi hat eine Liste von Praxisverwaltungssystemen veröffentlicht, die von Nutzern positiv bewertet werden. Eine gute Grundlage für wechselwillige Ärztinnen und Psychotherapeuten.

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

19.04.2024 Vorhofflimmern Nachrichten

Werden Personen mit Vorhofflimmern in der Blanking-Periode nach einer Katheterablation gegen eine bestehende Parodontitis behandelt, verbessert dies die Erfolgsaussichten. Dafür sprechen die Resultate einer prospektiven Untersuchung.

Newsletter

Bestellen Sie unseren kostenlosen Newsletter Update Zahnmedizin und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.