Cranio : the journal of craniomandibular practice · 2017
WHO-5 well-being index as screening instrument for psychological comorbidity in patients with temporomandibular disorder.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ismail Fadi, Lange Karin, Gillig Marit, Zinken Katarzyna, Schwabe Lena, Stiesch Meike, Eisenburger Michael
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to compare the WHO-Five Well-Being Index (WHO-5) with the Oral Health Impact Profile-49 (OHIP-49) questionnaire as screening tools to detect psychological comorbidity in TMDs.
METHODS: A TMD group (92 patients, 42.8 ± 17.1 yrs) and a control group (90 patients of the Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, 38.9 ± 10.1 yrs) completed the WHO-5 and the OHIP-49 questionnaire.
RESULTS: The patients with TMD reported significantly greater OHIP-49 sum scores than controls (47.5 ± 34.7 vs. 7.7 ± 12.1; p < 0.001). The mean raw score of the WHO-5 was significantly less, with 45.6 ± 20.6 points for patients with TMD than the 73.2 ± 15.6 points found for controls (p < 0.001). The OHIP sum score and the WHO-5 raw score were significantly associated (r = 0.705, p < 0.001). Both instruments exhibited excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.967 and 0.883, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: WHO-5 proved to be an effective and economic screening instrument to detect psychological comorbidity in TMDs. Implementing WHO-5 in standard care could contribute to more individualized interdisciplinary psychotherapy and/or functional therapy.
METHODS: A TMD group (92 patients, 42.8 ± 17.1 yrs) and a control group (90 patients of the Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, 38.9 ± 10.1 yrs) completed the WHO-5 and the OHIP-49 questionnaire.
RESULTS: The patients with TMD reported significantly greater OHIP-49 sum scores than controls (47.5 ± 34.7 vs. 7.7 ± 12.1; p < 0.001). The mean raw score of the WHO-5 was significantly less, with 45.6 ± 20.6 points for patients with TMD than the 73.2 ± 15.6 points found for controls (p < 0.001). The OHIP sum score and the WHO-5 raw score were significantly associated (r = 0.705, p < 0.001). Both instruments exhibited excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.967 and 0.883, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: WHO-5 proved to be an effective and economic screening instrument to detect psychological comorbidity in TMDs. Implementing WHO-5 in standard care could contribute to more individualized interdisciplinary psychotherapy and/or functional therapy.