Premium
Child oral health‐related quality of life and early childhood caries: a non‐inferiority randomized control trial
Author(s) -
Arrow P,
Klobas E
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
australian dental journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.701
H-Index - 71
eISSN - 1834-7819
pISSN - 0045-0421
DOI - 10.1111/adj.12352
Subject(s) - wilcoxon signed rank test , randomized controlled trial , medicine , early childhood caries , oral health , early childhood , quality of life (healthcare) , confidence interval , randomization , test (biology) , pediatrics , dentistry , psychology , mann–whitney u test , developmental psychology , nursing , paleontology , biology
Background The aim of this study was to compare changes in child oral health‐related quality of life ( COHRQ oL) after treatment for early childhood caries ( ECC ) using two alternative treatment approaches. Methods A randomized control trial with random allocation of parent/child dyads with ECC to test (minimum intervention) or control (standard care). Participating parents completed the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale ( ECOHIS ) at baseline and follow‐up. Changes in ECOHIS scores and extent of COHRQ oL impacts between and within groups were tested using the chi‐squared statistic for groups, Wilcoxon's rank‐sum test, and matched‐pairs signed‐rank test. Results Two hundred and fifty‐four children were randomized (test = 127; control = 127). At baseline, mean ECOHIS score 11.1, sd 8.2; mean age = 3.8 years, sd 0.90; mean dmft = 4.9, sd 4.0; and 59% male. After a mean interval of 11.4 months, 210 children were followed‐up and returned a completed questionnaire (test = 111; control = 99). There was no significant difference in COHRQ oL changes between test and control. For all the children combined, there were significantly fewer impacts at follow‐up in the child and family domains and the total ECOHIS , Wilcoxon signed‐rank test, p < 0.05. Conclusions COHRQ oL improved with primary dental care for ECC , and there was no statistically significant difference between test and control in the extent of the improvement.