Several measures of oral health-related quality of life have been developed for children. The most frequently used are the Child Perceptions Questionnaire (CPQ), the Child Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (C-OIDP) and the Child Oral Health Impact Profile (COHIP). The aim of this study was to assess the methodological quality of the development and testing of these three measures.

Existing paediatric oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) measures are generic instruments designed to evaluate a range of oral conditions. It has been found that disease-specific measures may be more adept at detecting subtle changes which occur following treatment of the condition in question. Furthermore, existing self-report OHRQoL measures have not involved children at all stages of development of the measure. The aim of this study was to develop a caries-specific measure of quality of life for children. The first stage of the study involved a qualitative enquiry with children, aged 5–16 years, to inform the development of the measure. Children generated the potential items, contributed to item reduction and questionnaire design and participated in the testing of face and content validity. The resulting measure was evaluated in a cross-sectional validation study. Ethical approval was granted for the study. The qualitative study found that children discussed a number of caries-related impacts which affected their daily lives. These were incorporated into a draft measure which was further refined following testing of face and content validity. This resulted in the production of the Caries Impacts and Experiences Questionnaire for Children (CARIES-QC), comprising 16 items and one global question. Two hundred participants with a mean (range) age of 8.1 (5–16) years took part in the further evaluation of CARIES-QC. Four items, which did not fit the Rasch model, were removed from further analysis. The remaining 12 items demonstrated good internal consistency (alpha = 0.9) and the total score showed significant correlations with the number of decayed teeth, presence of pain, pulpal involvement, the Child Perceptions Questionnaire (16-item short form) and the global score (p < 0.01, Spearman’s rho). In conclusion, children’s input allowed the development of a valid and reliable child-centred caries-specific quality of life measure. CARIES-QC can now be used to evaluate which interventions for dental caries are most effective in reducing impacts from the child’s perspective.

To test the items, identified through qualitative inquiry that might form the basis of a new Malocclusion Impact Questionnaire (MIQ) to measure the oral health-related quality of life (OHQoL) of young people with malocclusion. Piloting with 13 young people reduced the number of items from 37 to 28. Cross-sectional testing involved a convenience sample aged 10-16 years, attending the Orthodontic Department of the Charles Clifford Dental Hospital, Sheffield. The fit and function of the initial MIQ questions were examined using item response theory. 184 participants (113 females; 71 males) completed a questionnaire (response 85%), seven participants were excluded due to missing responses. The mean age of participants was 12·9 years (SD 1·4) and they had a wide range of malocclusions. The majority were White British (67·4%). Data from 47 participants were used to analyse test-retest reliability. Rasch analysis was undertaken, which further reduced the number of items in the questionnaire from 28 to 17. Unidimensionality of the scale was confirmed. The analysis also identified that the original 5-point response scale could be reduced to three points. The new measure demonstrated good criterion validity (r = 0·751; P < 0·001) and construct validity with the two global questions ('Overall bother' ρ = 0·733 and 'Life overall' ρ = 0·701). Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0·906) and test-retest reliability Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC = 0·78; 95% CI 0·61-0·88) were also good. Cross-sectional testing has shown the new MIQ to be both valid and reliable. Further evaluation is required to confirm the generalisability as well as the ability of the new measure to detect change over time (responsiveness).