No abstract

Pain in the oro‐facial region is one of the most common reasons for patients to seek dental treatment. Oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL) can be affected not only by pain, but also by other oral disorders. Four main dimensions, Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance and Psychosocial Impact, have been suggested to cover different areas of OHRQoL. The aim of this systematic review was to map the impact of oro‐facial pain conditions on the Orofacial Pain dimension of OHRQoL (PROSPERO registration: CRD42017064033). Studies were included if they reported Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) mean or median domain scores for patients with odontogenic pain, oral mucosal pain/burning mouth syndrome (BMS), third molar extractions or temporomandibular disorders (TMD). A search in PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL and PsycINFO on 8 June 2017, updated 14 January 2019, combined with a hand search identified 2104 articles. After screening of abstracts, 1607 articles were reviewed in full text and 36 articles were included that reported OHIP data for 44 patient populations including 5849 patients. Typical Orofacial Pain impact for all four conditions (odontogenic pain, oral mucosal pain/BMS, pain after third molar extractions and TMD) was between 2 and 3 on a 0‐8 converted OHIP scale with the highest reported impact for pain after 3rd molar extractions. This review provides standardised information about OHRQoL impact from four oro‐facial pain conditions as a model for the Orofacial Pain dimension. The results show moderate impact for the pain dimension of OHRQoL in patients with common oro‐facial pain conditions.

Orofacial conditions were common and often coexist. The comorbidity group experienced the highest impact on oral health-related quality of life: the more the comorbid conditions, the greater the negative impact.

Objectives For jaw functional limitations measured by the Jaw Functional Limitation Scale (JFLS), (a) determining prevalence in the Swedish general adult population, (b) investigating the influence of demographic factors and self‐reported dental status and (c) deriving normative values. Methods A random sample of the general adult population in Sweden was approached (response rate: 46%, N = 1,372). Prevalence was determined for the JFLS summary score and individual items. The influence of age, gender and dental status was investigated with regression analyses and normative values presented. Results The JFLS median score was 0, and all items had prevalences ≤30%. Age and gender did not influence jaw functional limitations but dental status did. Normative JFLS scores were 1, 9 and 28 for the 7th, 8th and 9th deciles, respectively. In dental status‐stratified norms, 9th deciles were 20, 43 and 100, for subjects with natural teeth only, removable and complete dentures, respectively. Conclusions The Swedish general adult population had excellent jaw function, but dental status was major determinant. In the absence of information linking JFLS scores to important patient concerns, the score distribution can serve as a reference with the 9th decile as threshold for functional limitation.

Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact—the dimensions of oral health‐related quality of life—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. Using scores for these dimensions, the project Mapping Oral Disease Impact with a Common Metric (MOM) aims to provide four‐dimensional oral health impact information across oral diseases and settings. In this article, project authors summarize MOM’s findings and provide recommendations about how to improve standardized oral health impact assessment. Project MOM’s systematic reviews identified four‐dimensional impact information for 189 adult and 22 pediatric patient populations that were contained in 170 publications. A typical functional, pain‐related, 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. Project MOM provides five recommendations to improve standardized oral health impact assessment for all oral diseases in all settings.

No abstract