Premium
Validity and reliability of the Chronic Oral Mucosal Diseases Questionnaire in a UK population
Author(s) -
Ni Riordain Richeal,
Hodgson Tim,
Porter Stephen,
Fedele Stefano
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of oral pathology and medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.887
H-Index - 83
eISSN - 1600-0714
pISSN - 0904-2512
DOI - 10.1111/jop.12425
Subject(s) - recurrent aphthous stomatitis , pemphigus vulgaris , medicine , oral lichen planus , oral mucosa , oral medicine , stomatitis , visual analogue scale , pemphigoid , dermatology , construct validity , population , cicatricial pemphigoid , dentistry , physical therapy , psychometrics , pathology , bullous pemphigoid , immunology , clinical psychology , environmental health , antibody
Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the validity and reliability of a the Chronic Oral Mucosal Diseases Questionnaire in a UK population Methods Two hundred patients with chronic oral mucosal disease (oral lichen planus, recurrent aphthous stomatitis, mucous membrane pemphigoid, pemphigus vulgaris) were enrolled in this study from the Oral Medicine Department of University College London Hospitals Trust ( UCLHT ) Eastman Dental Hospital. Individuals were interviewed using Oral Health Impact Profile ( OHIP ‐14), Visual Analogue Scale ( VAS ) and Chronic Oral Mucosal Diseases Questionnaire ( COMDQ ), and the construct validity and internal reliability were examined. Results Of the 200 study participants, 100 respondents had oral lichen planus, 42 had recurrent aphthous stomatitis and 58 had vesiculobullous conditions (mucous membrane pemphigoid or pemphigus vulgaris). With regard to construct validity, a moderate to good degree of convergent validity was found between OHIP ‐14 and VAS and most subscales and the total COMDQ score except the patient support subscale of COMDQ (0.21–0.37). Conclusion COMDQ is a valid and reliable patient‐reported outcome measure for patients with chronic oral mucosal diseases in a UK population. It can be considered a valuable instrument in both clinical practice and in oral medicine research.