RESUMO
Objectives: To shorten the 24-item Arabic Psychosocial Impact of Dental Aesthetics Questionnaire (PIDAQ(A)) for adolescents in Yemen. Material and methods: Two shortening methods derived six-item and nine-item versions: the item impact method selected items with the highest impact scores as rated by 30 participants in each subscale; and the regression method was applied using data of 385 participants from the PIDAQ(A) validity study, with the total PIDAQ(A) score as the dependent variable, and its individual items as the independent variables. The four derived versions were assessed for validity and reliability. Results: The means of the six-item and nine-item short versions of both methods were close. Cronbach's alpha values extended from 0.90 to 0.92 (intra-class correlations = 0.85−0.88). In criterion validity, strong significant correlations were detected between scores of all short versions and the 24-item PIDAQ(A) score (0.96−0.98; p < 0.001). Construct validity displayed significant associations among all short versions and self-perceived dental appearance rank and self-perceived need for orthodontic braces rank (p < 0.05). Mean scores of all short versions were significantly different between adolescents with severe malocclusion and those with slight malocclusion in discriminant validity tests. In conclusion, all PIDAQ(A) short versions are valid and reliable.
RESUMO
(1) This study aimed to generate a simplified form of the Malaysian psychosocial impact of dental aesthetics questionnaire (PIDAQ[M]) and validate its use in the sociodental approach for estimating orthodontic treatment need. (2) Two eight-item forms were derived: an impact simplified PIDAQ[M] (ISP8), comprising the most impactful items as rated by 35 participants, and a regression simplified PIDAQ[M] (RSP8), derived from regression analysis of 590 participants' data from the PIDAQ[M] validation study. Their psychometric performances were assessed for internal consistency, validity (criterion and construct), reproducibility (reliability and agreement), and responsiveness to change. The sociodental estimates were based on 204 orthodontic patients' data who were assessed for normative need, impact-related need, and propensity-related need. McNemar analysis compared the sociodental estimates when both simplified PIDAQ[M] forms and the original PIDAQ[M] were used to measure impact-related need. (3) Both simplified PIDAQ[M] forms were valid, reproducible, and responsive. The sociodental estimates when using the ISP8 (38.2%) were similar to when the PIDAQ[M] (35.8%) was used (p > 0.05) but overestimated by 3.4% (p < 0.05) when the RSP8 (39.2%) was used as the assessment tool. (4) The simplified PIDAQ[M] can replace the original PIDAQ[M] in the sociodental approach to estimate the orthodontic treatment needs of the Malaysian population.