Author:
Fan Yanpin,Shu Xin,Leung Katherine Chiu Man,Lo Edward Chin Man
Abstract
Abstract
Objective
The aim of this systematic review was to critically evaluate the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for masticatory function in adults.
Methods
Five electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL Plus and APA PsycINFO) were searched up to March 2021. Studies reporting development or validation of PROMs for masticatory function on adults were identified. Methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) risk of bias checklist. Psychometric properties of the PROM in each included study were rated against the criteria for good measurement properties based on the COSMIN guideline.
Results
Twenty-three studies investigating 19 PROMs were included. Methodological qualities of these studies were diverse. Four types of PROMs were identified: questions using food items to assess masticatory function (13 PROMs), questions on chewing problems (3 PROMs), questions using both food items and chewing problems (2 PROMs) and a global question (1 PROM). Only a few of these PROMs, namely chewing function questionnaire-Chinese, Croatian or Albanian, food intake questionnaire-Japanese, new food intake questionnaire-Japanese, screening for masticatory disorders in older adults and perceived difficulty of chewing-Tanzania demonstrated high or moderate level of evidence in several psychometric properties.
Conclusions
Currently, there is no PROM for masticatory function in adults with high-level evidence for all psychometric properties. There are variations in the psychometric properties among the different reported PROMs.
Trial Registration PROSPERO (CRD42020171591).
Funder
Tam Wah Ching Endowed Professorship, University of Hong Kong
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference60 articles.
1. Hong Kong Government. Oral Health Survey. Hong Kong, 2011. https://www.toothclub.gov.hk/en/en_pdf/Oral_Health_Survey_2011/Oral_Health_Survey_2011_WCAG_20141112_(EN_Full).pdf. Accessed 15 May 2021.
2. Hackley DM, Jain S, Pagni SE, Finkelman M, Ntaganira J, Morgan JP. Oral health conditions and correlates: a National Oral Health Survey of Rwanda. Glob Health Action. 2021;14(1):1904628.
3. Kwon SH, Park HR, Lee YM, Kwon SY, Kim OS, Kim HY, et al. Difference in food and nutrient intakes in Korean elderly people according to chewing difficulty: using data from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2013 (6th). Nutr Res Pract. 2017;11(2):139–46.
4. Wright FAC, Law GG, Milledge KL, Chu SK, Hsu B, Valdez E, et al. Chewing function, general health and the dentition of older Australian men: the Concord Health and Ageing in Men Project. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2019;47(2):134–41.
5. Gonçalves T, Schimmel M, van der Bilt A, Chen J, van der Glas HW, Kohyama K, et al. Consensus on the terminologies and methodologies for masticatory assessment. J Oral Rehabil. 2021;48(6):745–61.
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献