Comparative Analysis of OHIP Versions for Research on Temporomandibular Disorders

Abstract

Background: An international team has recommended assessing oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in four dimensions and using the Oral Health Impact Profile-5 (OHIP-5) for all oral health conditions. Objectives: This study compared OHIP summary, domain, and dimension scores among individuals with no and different Temporomandibular Disorder (TMD) symptoms, examined correlations across OHIP versions, and explored the use of OHIP-5 for TMD research. Methods: Young adults completed the Five TMD Symptoms (5Ts) screener and items from the OHIP-49, OHIP-14, OHIP-5, and OHIP-TMD. Participants were categorised into no (NT), intra-articular (IT), pain-related (PT), and combined (CT) TMD symptom groups. Data were analysed with the chi-square test and nonparametric tests, including Spearman's correlation (α = 0.05). Results: The final sample consisted of 573 individuals (mean age 19.3 years [SD 1.3]; 82.6% women), of whom 64.0% reported NT, while 21.8%, 4.2%, and 10.0% had IT, PT, and CT symptoms, respectively. Significant differences in summary scores were consistent across participant groups (CT/PT/IT>NT; CT>IT) for all OHIP versions, though variations were observed in domain and dimension scores. Notably, no significant differences in the Psychosocial Impact dimension were identified for the OHIP-5. Summary scores for the OHIP-49 and OHIP-14 were very strongly correlated with those for OHIP-TMD, whereas the OHIP-5 demonstrated a strong correlation (rs = 0.86–0.94). Conclusions: A four-dimensional impact framework is suitable for use in TMD research. While the OHIP-5 can evaluate overall OHRQoL, its substitution for OHIP-14 or OHIP-TMD should be considered only when brevity is prioritised over dimension-specific assessment.