Previous Article in Journal
Antibiotic Resistance Patterns of Escherichia coli from Children’s Sandpits in Durban, South Africa: A Point Prevalence Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Hygiene
Volume 6
Issue 1
10.3390/hygiene6010004
hygiene-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

A Cross-Sectional Assessment of Oral Health and Quality of Life Among Dental Patients at a Public Special Care Center in Greece: A Cross-Sectional Study

by
Eirini Thanasi
1,
Maria Antoniadou
2,3,*,
Petros Galanis
4 and
Vasiliki Kapaki
5
1
Rene Descartes College, 10680 Athens, Greece
2
Department of Dentistry, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 2 Thivon Str., 11527 Athens, Greece
3
Certified Systemic Analyst Program, University of Piraeus, 18534 Piraeus, Greece
4
Clinical Epidemiology Laboratory, Faculty of Nursing, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11527 Athens, Greece
5
Department of Medicine, School of Health Sciences, Democritus University of Thrace, University Campus, Dragana Area, 68100 Alexandroupolis, Greece
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Hygiene 2026, 6(1), 4; https://doi.org/10.3390/hygiene6010004
Submission received: 5 November 2025 / Revised: 16 December 2025 / Accepted: 1 January 2026 / Published: 12 January 2026
(This article belongs to the Section Public Health and Preventive Medicine)
Versions Notes

Abstract

Background: Despite its crucial role in overall health, oral health is frequently overlooked within healthcare systems, partly due to the misconception that oral diseases are neither life-threatening nor directly disabling. This perception has led to an underestimation of the psychological, social, and economic burden associated with oral diseases. Τhe present study aimed to assess oral health status and oral health-related quality of life among dental patients attending a public Special Care Center in Greece. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 400 dental patients aged 18 years and older who visited a public Special Care Center for a routine check-up or a dental problem between September and October 2024. Data was collected through personal interviews and clinical examinations after informed consent was obtained. Oral health-related quality of life was evaluated using the Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) and the Oral Impacts on Daily Performance (OIDP) questionnaires. Categorical variables were presented as absolute and relative frequencies, while quantitative variables were summarized as mean, standard deviation, median, minimum, and maximum. Normality was assessed using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. Bivariate analyses and multivariate linear regression models were performed, with statistical significance set at p < 0.05. Statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS 23.0. Results: The majority of participants were female (56.3%) with a mean age of 50.4 years (SD = 14.9). Overall oral health-related quality of life was moderate (OHIP-14: Mean = 21.0, SD = 14.8; OIDP: Mean = 14.0, SD = 12.8). Patients who attended the center due to a dental problem reported significantly poorer oral health outcomes than those attending routine check-ups (p < 0.001). Poorer self-rated oral health, having ≥12 missing teeth, prosthetic restoration, and foreign nationality were significantly associated with worse oral health-related quality of life. Conclusions: Dental patients attending the Special Care Center demonstrated moderate oral health status, which was associated with psychological distress, physical disability, and social limitations. These findings underline the need for targeted public oral health interventions, especially for vulnerable population groups.

1. Introduction

Oral health constitutes a core component of general health and well-being, directly influencing essential daily functions such as eating, speaking, and social interaction [1]. Beyond clinical indicators, oral health significantly affects psychological well-being, social participation, and overall quality of life, particularly among adults living with chronic oral conditions [2,3,4,5,6,7]. Oral diseases, including dental caries, erosion, periodontal disease, and tooth loss, remain among the most prevalent non-communicable diseases worldwide and disproportionately affect adults from socioeconomically vulnerable groups [7,8,9]. When left untreated, these conditions are associated with persistent pain, functional impairment, aesthetic concerns, and a substantial reduction in quality of life [10,11,12,13]. Furthermore, a growing body of evidence highlights bidirectional associations between oral health and systemic conditions such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, and respiratory infections, further underlining the importance of oral health within a broader public health framework [14,15].
Quality of life is defined by the World Health Organization as an individual’s perception of their position in life within their cultural and value systems and in relation to their goals, expectations, standards, and concerns [16]. Within this conceptual framework, oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) has emerged as a key construct that captures the subjective impact of oral health on physical, psychological, and social functioning [17,18,19]. OHRQoL is now widely recognized as an essential outcome measure in adult dental research, complementing traditional clinical indices and enabling a more patient-centered evaluation of oral health status [20,21]. Among the adult population, OHRQoL is influenced by multiple factors, including the severity of oral disease, tooth loss, periodontal status, prosthetic rehabilitation, and access to dental care services [12,22,23]. Socioeconomic inequalities, financial barriers, and psychological factors such as dental anxiety further augment disparities in perceived oral health and quality of life [2,21]. Evidence consistently indicates that periodontal disease and tooth loss often exert a greater negative impact on OHRQoL than isolated carious lesions, primarily through their effects on functional ability and social interaction [11,22].
In Greece, these challenges are intensified by structural characteristics of the healthcare system. Dental care remains insufficiently integrated into primary healthcare services, with limited public funding and a strong reliance on out-of-pocket payments [15,24]. Recent national data suggest that a substantial proportion of adults requiring dental treatment do not access care due to financial constraints, highlighting significant unmet oral health needs within the population [7]. These barriers report on the importance of evaluating oral health outcomes and OHRQoL within public dental care settings, particularly among adult patients who rely on publicly provided services [7,15,24].
Validated patient-reported outcome measures, such as the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) and the Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (OIDP), are widely used to assess OHRQoL in adult populations and have demonstrated strong psychometric properties across diverse cultural contexts, including Greece [25,26]. The use of these instruments enables a comprehensive assessment of the functional, psychological, and social consequences of oral health conditions beyond what can be captured through clinical indicators alone [26].
The present study aims to assess the association between oral health status and quality of life among adult patients attending a public dental care center in Greece. It is hypothesized that poorer oral health status, as assessed by OHIP-14 and OIDP indices, is associated with lower self-reported quality of life, increased psychological distress, and greater functional limitations. By focusing on adult patients within a public care context, this study seeks to contribute evidence relevant to public health planning and to inform the development of targeted interventions aimed at reducing oral health inequalities and improving patient-centered outcomes.

2. Materials and Methods

This cross-sectional observational study was designed to evaluate oral health status and its impact on quality of life among adult dental patients attending a public dental care facility in Greece. The study was conducted at the Special Care Center-Lenorman Dental Center (KEFOK LENORMAN), a public institution that provides free dental services to a large and socioeconomically diverse patient population from across the country. Data collection took place between September and October 2024. The study protocol was approved by the Scientific Council of the 1st Regional Health Authority of Attica. (No. Protocol 44924). All clinical examinations were performed by a single calibrated dentist (E.T.) to ensure consistency and minimize inter-examiner variability.
The study sample consisted of 400 adult dental patients, aged 18 years and older, who attended the center for routine check-ups, dental treatments, or prosthetic restorations during the study period (September–October 2024). Participants were selected using a systematic random sampling approach. Each day, patients were invited to participate at regular intervals (e.g., every third or fourth patient), based on appointment schedules or order of arrival, ensuring a representative and unbiased sample of the clinic’s daily patient flow. All patients were informed about the aims and procedures of the study and participated voluntarily after providing written informed consent. Data collection was conducted within the dental clinic through structured face-to-face interviews to ensure completeness and accuracy of responses. Following questionnaire completion, each participant underwent a clinical dental examination.
Data were collected using a structured questionnaire that required approximately five minutes to complete and consisted exclusively of closed-ended questions [27]. A quantitative research design was employed. The first section of the questionnaire collected demographic and social characteristics, reasons for dental visits, and self-rated oral health status, in accordance with previously established methodologies [28]. Participants subsequently completed two standardized and validated instruments: the Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) and the Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (OIDP), both of which assess the impact of oral health conditions on quality of life.
A total of 13 predictors were included in the statistical models. Assuming a small, anticipated effect size (f2 = 0.04) between the independent variables and the OHIP-14 score, a statistical power of 95%, and a significance level of 5%, the required sample size was estimated at 327 participants. Sample size calculation was performed using G*Power software (v.3.1.9.2).

2.1. Questionnaire Description

Two validated tools were used to assess oral health-related quality of life:
(1)
Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14): Developed by Slade, the OHIP-14 consists of 14 items grouped into 7 conceptual domains: functional limitation, physical pain, psychological discomfort, physical disability, psychological disability, social disability, and handicap. It assesses the impact of oral health conditions over the preceding 12 months [29]. The OHIP-14 has been validated in diverse populations, including elderly populations in Japan [30] and Malaysia [31], as well as general populations in the UK [32], Australia, Brazil [33], and Scotland [34]. In Greece, it was validated by Roumani et al. (2010) in a population aged 35 years and older [35]. Responses were recorded on a five-point Likert scale ranging from never = 0 to very often = 4, with participants selecting one response per item. Furthermore, the validity of mental health-related assessment tools in Greek populations has been demonstrated in previous studies, such as the validation of the Greek version of the HoNOS65+ scale for older adults [36].
(2)
Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (OIDP): The OIDP questionnaire, developed by Adulyanon and Sheiham (1997), consists of 8 items assessing the frequency of oral health-related impacts on daily activities, including eating, speaking, sleeping, relaxation, emotional well-being, oral hygiene, work, and social interaction over the previous 6 months [37]. The Greek version of the tool was adapted and validated by Tsakos et al. (2001) [38]. Responses were recorded on a five-point scale ranging from never = 0 to almost every day = 4.

2.2. Statistical Analysis

The reliability analysis of the OHIP-14 questionnaire demonstrated excellent internal consistency, with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.98, confirming its high reliability in assessing oral health-related quality of life (α = 0.98). Categorical variables were presented as absolute (n) and relative (%) frequencies, while continuous variables were summarized using mean, standard deviation, median, minimum, and maximum values. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was used to assess the normality of continuous variables. Bivariate analyses were performed to examine relationships between independent and dependent variables, including independent-samples t-tests for comparisons between continuous and dichotomous variables, Pearson’s correlation coefficient for associations between two normally distributed continuous variables, and Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient for relationships involving ordinal variables [39]. As both OHIP-14 and OIDP scores followed a normal distribution, multivariable linear regression analyses were performed to identify factors independently associated with oral health-related quality of life after adjustment for potential confounders. Regression results were expressed as beta coefficients (b), 95% confidence intervals (CI), and p-values. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. All statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 28.0. (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Demographic Characteristics

The study sample comprised 400 adult dental patients, of whom the majority were female (56.3%). The mean age of patients was 50.4 years (SD = 14.9). Regarding nationality, 84.0% of participants were Greek, 6.3% were Albanian, 2.8% were Pakistani, and 7.1% belonged to other nationalities. In terms of educational attainment, 30.5% of the participants had completed secondary education, 26.9% held a higher education degree (Technical Institutes/Universities—TEI/AEI), 21.3% were graduates of vocational training institutes (IEK), 20.3% had completed primary education, and 1.3% reported no formal education. Regarding employment status, 69.5% of participants were employed, whereas 31.5% were unemployed. Almost all participants (98.7%) reported having health insurance, while only 1.3% were uninsured.

3.2. Clinical Characteristics

Overall, 62.7% of participants visited the dental center due to an existing dental problem, while 37.3% attended for a routine check-up. Regarding self-perceived oral health status, 42.0% of participants rated their oral health as moderate, 34.5% as good, and 23.5% as poor. Additionally, 16.5% of participants reported experiencing halitosis. With respect to oral appearance, 39.0% of participants rated it as moderate, 34.8% as good, and 26.3% as poor. The DMFT index was categorized as moderate in 50.5% of participants, low in 32.8%, and high in 16.8%. Tooth loss was also assessed, with 22.5% of participants reporting a loss of 12 or more teeth, while 77.5% had lost fewer than 12 teeth. Periodontal health status was self-rated as moderate by 46.5% of participants, good by 44.5%, and poor by 9.0%. In addition, 28.7% of participants had fixed prosthetic restorations, whereas 13.3% had removable prosthetic restorations.
Descriptive analysis of the OHIP-14 items revealed key areas in which oral health problems significantly affected participants’ daily functioning. Higher mean scores indicated worse oral health-related quality of life. Detailed results are presented in Table 1.
Further analysis of the OHIP-14 domains demonstrated distinct patterns in the impact of oral health on daily life (Table 2). The domains most strongly affected were psychological discomfort, physical disability, handicap, and physical pain, indicating that oral health problems predominantly burdened emotional well-being, functional capacity, and overall life satisfaction. Elevated scores in psychological discomfort suggest that feelings of embarrassment and self-consciousness related to oral health were particularly prominent among participants. Similarly, physical disability reflected meaningful difficulties in basic activities such as eating and speaking, while the handicap domain indicated broader negative effects on social participation and perceived quality of life. The frequent reporting of physical pain further underlines the close association between oral disease and physical discomfort. In contrast, the domains of social disability, functional limitation, and psychological disability were less affected, suggesting that although oral health problems substantially influenced emotional and physical aspects of daily life, they did not severely restrict social interaction or cognitive functioning for most participants (Table 2).
Descriptive analysis of the OIDP indicated a moderate overall impact of oral health on participants’ quality of life (Table 3). The most frequently reported impacts were related to smiling without embarrassment, emotional well-being, eating and enjoyment of food, and participation in work and social activities, highlighting the predominance of psychological and social consequences associated with oral health problems. In contrast, difficulties related to speaking, sleeping or relaxing, and performing oral hygiene were less commonly reported, suggesting that basic functional activities were relatively preserved. Overall, these findings indicate that the psychological and social consequences of oral health problems outweighed purely functional limitations in this patient population (Table 3).
Table 4 presents the associations between independent variables and the OHIP-14 score.
Multivariable linear regression analysis was conducted to identify independent determinants of oral health-related quality of life, with statistically significant predictors being presented in Table 5. Patients who attended the dental center due to an existing dental problem, those who reported poor self-perceived oral health, and those who rated the appearance of their mouth as poor exhibited significantly worse OHIP-14 scores. Additionally, greater tooth loss (≥12 missing teeth) and the presence of prosthetic restorations were independently associated with poorer oral health-related quality of life. The final regression model demonstrated strong explanatory power, accounting for a substantial proportion of the variance in OHIP-14 scores (adjusted R2 = 0.72) (Table 5).

4. Discussion

The present study provides a comprehensive analysis of oral health-related quality of life among adult patients attending a public dental care center in Greece, highlighting the multifactorial nature of OHRQoL and the complex interplay between clinical, socioeconomic, and psychosocial determinants. Overall, the findings confirm that oral health-related quality of life is shaped not only by clinical indicators of disease but also by patients’ subjective perceptions, access to dental care, and the broader social and healthcare context.
Age emerged as a consistent determinant of poorer OHRQoL, with older patients reporting significantly worse OHIP-14 and OIDP scores. This finding aligns with recent evidence indicating that cumulative oral disease burden, progressive tooth loss, and long-term functional limitations disproportionately affect older adults [25,40]. As individuals age, the progressive nature of periodontal disease, dental caries, and increasing prosthetic needs appears to intensify the negative impact of oral health on daily functioning and overall well-being, underlining the importance of preventive strategies across the life course [41,42,43].
Educational attainment was also strongly associated with oral health outcomes, with higher levels of education linked to better OHRQoL. This association is well documented in contemporary literature and reflects the role of education in shaping health literacy, preventive behaviors, and timely utilization of dental services [44]. Individuals with higher educational attainment are more likely to engage in preventive oral health practices, seek regular dental care, and adopt health-promoting behaviors, thereby reducing disease severity and its adverse impact on quality of life [44,45].
Among clinical factors, tooth loss emerged as one of the strongest predictors of impaired OHRQoL. The finding that extensive tooth loss (≥12 missing teeth) was associated with markedly worse quality-of-life scores is consistent with recent studies emphasizing the central role of dentition in functional, aesthetic, and psychosocial well-being [44,45,46,47,48]. Tooth loss compromises mastication, speech, facial appearance, and social confidence, thereby exerting a multidimensional impact on daily life [49,50,51]. Importantly, the results suggest the existence of a threshold effect, beyond which the cumulative consequences of tooth loss become particularly detrimental to quality of life [52].
Interestingly, the presence of prosthetic restorations was associated with poorer OHRQoL, a finding that challenges the conventional assumption that prosthetic rehabilitation uniformly improves quality of life. Similar observations have been reported in the recent literature, indicating that prosthetic interventions do not automatically translate into improved patient-reported outcomes [53]. This association may reflect issues related to prosthetic fit, comfort, aesthetics, adaptation difficulties, and unmet patient expectations. Contemporary evidence suggests that fixed prosthetic solutions are generally associated with better OHRQoL outcomes than removable dentures, highlighting the importance of individualized treatment planning, appropriate prosthetic selection, and realistic patient counseling [54,55].
Beyond clinical indicators, psychosocial factors played a central role in shaping OHRQoL in this study. The prominence of psychological discomfort, emotional distress, and aesthetic concerns supports growing evidence that patients’ subjective perceptions often outweigh objective clinical findings in determining quality of life [56,57]. In this context, oral health problems function not merely as physical impairments but also as sources of social vulnerability, affecting self-esteem, social participation, and emotional well-being [7,20,58].
The Greek healthcare context further amplifies these challenges. Limited integration of dental care into primary healthcare services, high out-of-pocket expenditures, and persistent financial barriers continue to restrict access to timely and preventive dental services, particularly among socioeconomically disadvantaged populations [59,60]. The substantial proportion of unmet dental needs due to cost constraints highlights systemic inequities that translate directly into poorer oral health outcomes and diminished quality of life. These structural barriers show the importance of interpreting OHRQoL findings within a broader health system and policy framework, rather than solely at the individual level.
Several limitations of this study should be acknowledged. The cross-sectional design precludes causal inference, allowing only associations between oral health and quality of life to be identified [61]. The reliance on self-reported questionnaires may introduce response bias, although both the OHIP-14 and OIDP instruments demonstrated excellent reliability in this population [7,20,58,62]. Additionally, as the study was conducted in a public dental care setting serving predominantly lower-socioeconomic-status groups, the generalizability of the findings to the private sector or higher-income populations may be limited [63]. Nevertheless, the study’s strengths include a strong sample size, methodological consistency in data collection, and the use of validated patient-reported outcome measures, providing valuable insights into oral health-related quality of life among underserved adult populations [64].

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, this study reinforces the understanding that oral health-related quality of life is shaped by a complex interaction of clinical status, socioeconomic conditions, and psychosocial factors. The findings highlight the need for holistic, patient-centered dental care approaches that extend beyond symptom management to address emotional well-being, social participation, and equitable access to care. From a public health perspective, integrating oral health into broader healthcare strategies and prioritizing prevention, education, and equity-oriented policies are essential steps toward improving quality of life among adult populations.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, V.K. and E.T.; methodology, V.K., P.G. and M.A.; software, P.G. and V.K.; validation, E.T., M.A., P.G. and V.K.; formal analysis, P.G. and M.A.; investigation, E.T.; resources, E.T., M.A., P.G. and V.K.; data curation, E.T., M.A., P.G. and V.K.; writing—original draft preparation, E.T., M.A., P.G. and V.K.; writing—review and editing, E.T., M.A., P.G. and V.K.; visualization, E.T., P.G. and V.K.; supervision, V.K.; project administration, M.A., P.G. and V.K.; funding acquisition, E.T., M.A., P.G. and V.K.; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Scientific Council of the 1st Regional Health Authority of Attica. (No. Protocol 44924/20 March 2024).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. WHO. The World Oral Health Report: Continuous Improvement of Oral Health in the 21st Century—The Approach of the WHO Global Oral Health Programme. 2003. Available online: https://www3.paho.org/hq/dmdocuments/2009/OH_st_WHO.pdf (accessed on 5 May 2025).
  2. Varzakas, T.; Antoniadou, M. A Holistic Approach for Ethics and Sustainability in the Food Chain: The Gateway to Oral and Systemic Health. Foods 2024, 13, 1224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Mielle, B.; Júdice, A.; Proença, L.; Machado, V.; Vieira, A.M.; Mendes, J.J.; Manso, C.; Rozan, C.; Botelho, J. Dental Caries, Tooth Erosion and Nutritional Habits in a Cohort of Athletes: A Cross-Sectional Study. Nutrients 2025, 17, 543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Syngelakis, A. There is no Health without Oral Health! The Historic WHO Resolution on Oral Health as a Challenge for Health System Reform. In Proceedings of the Innovation in Education—Interprofessional Work: Developing Oral Care and the Health Workforce for the Future, Brescia, Italy, 27–30 April 2023. [Google Scholar]
  5. John, M.T. Foundations of oral health-related quality of life. J. Oral Rehabil. 2021, 48, 355–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Tiwari, T.; Kelly, A.; Randall, C.L.; Tranby, E.; Franstve-Hawley, J. Association Between Mental Health and Oral Health Status and Care Utilization. Front. Oral Health 2022, 2, 732882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Karnaki, P.; Katsas, K.; Diamantis, D.V.; Riza, E.; Rosen, M.S.; Antoniadou, M.; Gil-Salmerón, A.; Grabovac, I.; Linou, A. Dental Health, Caries Perception and Sense of Discrimination among Migrants and Refugees in Europe: Results from the Mig-HealthCare Project. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 9294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Barranca-Enríquez, A.; Romo-González, T. Your health is in your mouth: A comprehensive view to promote general wellness. Front. Oral Health 2022, 3, 971223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Chaffee, B.W.; Rodrigues, P.H.; Kramer, P.F.; Vítolo, M.R.; Feldens, C.A. Oral health-related quality-of-life scores differ by socioeconomic status and caries experience. Community Dent. Oral. Epidemiol. 2017, 45, 216–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kranjčić, J.; Mikuš, A.; Peršić, S.; Vojvodić, D. Factors Affecting Oral Health-Related Quality of Life Among Elderly Croatian Patients. Acta Stomatol. Croat. 2014, 48, 174–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Jansson, H.; Wahlin, Å.; Johansson, V.; Åkerman, S.; Lundegren, N.; Isberg, P.E.; Norderyd, O. Impact of periodontal disease experience on oral health–related quality of life. J. Periodontol. 2014, 85, 438–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Masood, M.; Newton, T.; Bakri, N.N.; Khalid, T.; Masood, Y. The relationship between oral health and oral health related quality of life among elderly people in United Kingdom. J. Dent. 2017, 56, 78–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Janto, M.; Iurcov, R.; Daina, C.M.; Neculoiu, D.C.; Venter, A.C.; Badau, D.; Cotovanu, A.; Negrau, M.; Suteu, C.L.; Sabau, M.; et al. Oral Health among Elderly, Impact on Life Quality, Access of Elderly Patients to Oral Health Services and Methods to Improve Oral Health: A Narrative Review. J. Pers. Med. 2022, 12, 372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Prasad, M.; Manjunath, C.; Murthy, A.K.; Sampath, A.; Jaiswal, S.; Mohapatra, A. Integration of oral health into primary health care: A systematic review. J. Fam. Med. Prim. Care 2019, 8, 1838–1845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. ELSTAT. Health: Health Status, Use of Healthcare Services, Health Determinants 2022 Survey on Income and Living Conditions (Income Reference Period: 2021). 2023. Available online: https://www.statistics.gr/documents/20181/dd8596b0-2629-2727-b323-dadc44b30925 (accessed on 5 May 2025).
  16. WHO. WHOQOL: Measuring Quality of Life. 2012. Available online: https://www.who.int/tools/whoqol (accessed on 5 May 2025).
  17. Karimi, M.; Brazier, J. Health, health-related quality of life, and quality of life: What is the difference? Pharmacoeconomics 2016, 34, 645–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Sekulić, S.; John, M.T.; Davey, C.; Rener-Sitar, K. Association between oral health-related and health-related quality of life. Slov. J. Public. Health 2020, 59, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Sischo, L.; Broder, H.L. Oral health-related quality of life: What, why, how, and future implications. J. Dent. Res. 2011, 90, 1264–1270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Antoniadou, M.; Mangoulia, P.; Myrianthefs, P. Quality of Life and Wellbeing Parameters of Academic Dental and Nursing Personnel vs. quality of services. Healthcare 2023, 11, 2792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Malicka, B.; Skośkiewicz-Malinowska, K.; Kaczmarek, U. The impact of socioeconomic status, general health and oral health on Health-Related Quality of Life, Oral Health-Related Quality of Life and mental health among Polish older adults. BMC Geriatr. 2022, 22, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hijryana, M.; MacDougall, M.; Ariani, N.; Kusdhany, L.S.; Walls, A.W.G. Impact of Periodontal Disease on the Quality of Life of Older People in Indonesia: A Qualitative Study. JDR Clin. Trans. Res. 2022, 7, 360–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Al Shammary, N.H. Exploring the impact of oral health on the quality of life in older patients: A cross-sectional study. BDJ Open 2024, 10, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Gkavela, G.; Kossioni, A.; Lyrakos, G.; Karkazis, H.; Volikas, K. Oral health related quality of life in older people: Preliminary validation of the Greek version of the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI). Eur. Geriatr. Med. 2015, 6, 245–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Campos, L.A.; Peltomäki, T.; Marôco, J.; Campos, J.A.D.B. Use of Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) in Different Contexts. What Is Being Measured? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 2021, 18, 13412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Bantel, D.; Chmielewski, W.X.; Brähler, E.; Stöbel-Richter, Y.; Zenger, M.; Berth, H. Variables associated with oral health-related self-efficacy—Results of a cross-sectional study. BMC Oral Health 2023, 23, 939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Sharma, H. How short or long should be a questionnaire for any research? Researchers dilemma in deciding the appropriate questionnaire length. Saudi J. Anaesth. 2022, 16, 65–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Maida, C.A.; Xiong, D.; Marcus, M.; Zhou, L.; Huang, Y.; Lyu, Y.; Shen, J.; Osuna-Garcia, A.; Liu, H. Quantitative data collection approaches in subject-reported oral health research: A scoping review. BMC Oral Health 2022, 22, 435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Slade, G.D.; Spencer, A.J. Development and evaluation of Oral Health Impact Profile. Community Dent. Health 1994, 11, 3–11. [Google Scholar]
  30. Ikebe, K.; Hazeyama, T.; Enoki, K.; Murai, S.; Okada, T.; Kagawa, R.; Matsuda, K.; Maeda, Y. Comparison of GOHAI and OHIP-14 measures in relation to objective values of oral function in elderly Japanese. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2012, 40, 406–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Saub, R.; Locker, D.; Allison, P.; Disman, M. Cross-cultural adaptation of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) for the Malaysian adult population. Community Dent. Health 2007, 24, 166–175. [Google Scholar]
  32. Office for Health Improvement and Disparities. Adult Oral Health Survey 2021: Self-Reported Health and Oral Impacts. Accredited Official Statistics. 2024. Available online: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/adult-oral-health-survey-2021/adult-oral-health-survey-2021-self-reported-health-and-oral-impacts (accessed on 20 October 2025).
  33. Soares, G.H.; Santiago, P.H.R.; Werneck, R.I.; Michel-Crosato, E.; Jamieson, L. A Psychometric Network Analysis of OHIP-14 across Australian and Brazilian Populations. JDR Clin. Transl. Res. 2021, 6, 333–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Fernandes, M.J.; Ruta, D.A.; Ogden, G.R.; Pitts, N.B.; Ogston, S.A. Assessing oral health-related quality of life in general dental practice in Scotland: Validation of the OHIP-14. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2006, 34, 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Roumani, T.; Oulis, C.J.; Papagiannopoulou, V.; Yfantopoulos, J. Validation of a Greek version of the oral health impact profile (OHIP-14) in adolescents. Eur. Arch. Paediatr. Dent. 2010, 11, 247–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Adamis, D.; Papanikolaou, V.; Michailidis, M.; Macdonald, A.J. Validation of the Greek version of the Health of the Nation Outcome Scales for Elderly People (HoNOS65+, version 3). Aging Ment. Health 2013, 17, 258–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Adulyanon, S.; Sheiham, A. Oral impacts on daily performances. In Measuring Oral Health Quality of Life; Slade, G.D., Ed.; University of North Carolina, Dental Ecology: Chapter Hill, NC, USA, 1997; pp. 152–160. [Google Scholar]
  38. Tsakos, G.; Marcemes, W.; Sheiham, A. Evaluation of a modified version of the index oral impacts on daily performances (OIDP) in elderly populations in two European countries. Gerodontology 2001, 18, 121–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Schober, P.; Boer, C.; Schwarte, L.A. Correlation Coefficients: Appropriate Use and Interpretation. Anesth. Analg. 2018, 126, 1763–1768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Block, C.; König, H.H.; Hajek, A. Oral health and quality of life: Findings from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe. BMC Oral Health 2022, 22, 606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Henricsson, S.; Wallin Bengtsson, V.; Renvert, S.; Sanmartin Berglund, J.; Lundegren, N.; Andersson, P. Self-perceived oral health and orofacial appearance in older adults—An 18-year follow-up study in Karlskrona, Sweden. Acta Odontol. Scand. 2024, 83, 255–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Shaharuddin, I.; Rajali, A. Prevalence of Denatl Caries and Their Relation to Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) among National Contact Sports Athletes: A Cross-Sectional Study. J. Int. Oral Health 2021, 13, 593–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Chimbinha, Í.G.M.; Ferreira, B.N.C.; Miranda, G.P. Oral-health-related quality of life in adolescents: Umbrella review. BMC Public Health 2023, 23, 1603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Márquez-Arrico, C.F.; Almerich-Silla, J.M.; Montiel-Company, J.M. Oral health knowledge in relation to educational level in an adult population in Spain. J. Clin. Exp. Dent. 2019, 11, e1143–e1150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Marcus, K.; Balasubramanian, M.; Short, S.; Sohn, W. Barriers and facilitators to dental care among culturally and linguistically diverse carers: A mixed-methods systematic review. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2022, 51, 327–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Gülcan, F.; Nasir, E.; Ekbäck, G. Change in Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (OIDP) with increasing age: Testing the evaluative properties of the OIDP frequency inventory using prospective data from Norway and Sweden. BMC Oral Health 2014, 14, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Islam, M.N.; Pial, M.S.I.; Noman, M.A. Oral health knowledge, attitudes, and practices among university students in Bangladesh: A cross-sectional study. Discov. Public Health 2025, 22, 242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Nikolic, A.; Schindler, S.; Moshammer, H. Tooth Loss and Oral Health-Related Quality of Life: A Study in a Convenience Sample from Austria. Dent. J. 2025, 13, 475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Mikkelsen, H.T.; Haraldstad, K.; Helseth, S. Pain and health-related quality of life in adolescents and the mediating role of self-esteem and self-efficacy: A cross-sectional study including adolescents and parents. BMC Psychol. 2021, 9, 128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Nono, D.; Bagenda, G.; Okullo, I.; Rwenyonyi, C.M. Exploring lived experiences with tooth loss among fully edentulous patients attending Makerere University Dental Hospital, Kampala, Uganda. BMC Oral Health 2024, 24, 1355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Spanemberg, J.C.; Cardoso, J.A.; Slob, E.M.G.B.; López-López, J. Quality of life related to oral health and its impact in adults. J. Stomatol. Oral Maxillo. Sur. 2019, 120, 234–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Imam, A.Y. Impact of Tooth Loss Position on Oral Health-Related Quality of Life in Adults Treated in the Community. J. Pharm. Bioallied Sci. 2021, 13, S969–S974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Techapiroontong, S.; Limpuangthip, N. Oral health-related quality of life and reasons for discontinuing partial removable dental prosthesis usage: A cross-sectional study with one to seven years of follow-up. BMC Oral Health 2024, 24, 355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Duong, H.Y.; Roccuzzo, A.; Stähli, A.; Salvi, G.E.; Lang, N.P.; Sculean, A. Oral health-related quality of life of patients rehabilitated with fixed and removable implant-supported dental prostheses. Periodontol. 2000 2022, 88, 201–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Almasri, M.A. A 5-Year Satisfaction Outcome Study of Patients Receiving Six-Implant-Supported Fixed Prosthesis. Clin. Pract. 2021, 11, 827–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Papagiannopoulou, V.; Oulis, C.J.; Papaioannou, W.; Antonogeorgos, G.; Yfantopoulos, J. Validation of a Greek version of the oral health impact profile (OHIP-14) for use among adults. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 2012, 10, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Papaioannou, W.; Oulis, C.J.; Latsou, D.; Yfantopoulos, J. Oral health-related quality of life of Greek adults: A cross-sectional study. Int. J. Dent. 2011, 2011, 360292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Chauhan, S.; Breakfield, D.J.; Amornnimit, D.; Luceford, M.; Spearman, B.; Kamimura, A. Examining the Perceptions and Experiences of Dental Care Among Immigrant Free Clinic Patients. J. Patient Exp. 2024, 11, 23743735241305334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Souliotis, K.; Golna, C.; Baka, A.; Ntokou, A.; Zavras, D. Barriers in Access to Healthcare Services in Greece Post-COVID-19: Persisting Challenges for Health Policy. Healthcare 2025, 13, 1867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Kampouraki, M.; Paraskevopoulos, P.; Fachouri, E.; Terzoudis, S.; Karanasios, D. Building Strong Primary Healthcare Systems in Greece. Cureus 2023, 15, e41333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Liu, J.; Wong, M.C.M.; Lo, E.C.M. The use of Oral Health Impact on Daily Living (OHIDL) transition scale in measuring the change in oral health-related quality of life among older adults. BMC Oral Health 2021, 21, 230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Savitz, D.A.; Wellenius, G.A. Can Cross-Sectional Studies Contribute to Causal Inference? It Depends. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2023, 192, 514–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Joudi, A.; Sargeran, K.; Hessari, H. To appreciate the influence of contributed determinants on dental care utilization in the context of socio-economic inequalities. Int. J. Equity Health 2024, 23, 141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Sirwan, K.A. How to choose a sampling technique and determine sample size for research: A simplified guide for researchers. Oral Oncol. Rep. 2024, 12, 100662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Descriptive results for the 14 questions of the OHIP-14 questionnaire.
Table 1. Descriptive results for the 14 questions of the OHIP-14 questionnaire.
Due to Problems with Your Teeth, Dentures, or Mouth, How Often in the Past Year Have You Felt…MeanStandard DeviationMedianMinimumMaximum
Difficulty in pronouncing words?1.11.0104
A worsening sense of taste?1.41.1104
Severe and sharp pain in the mouth?1.91.2204
Difficulty in chewing?1.01.0104
Responsible for the problems?2.21.32.504
Tension/stress?2.11.2204
Dissatisfaction with diet?1.61.3204
Are meals being interrupted?1.61.3204
Difficulty in breathing and sleeping?1.21.1103
Feeling embarrassed?1.21.0103
Irritability towards others?1.11.0104
Difficulty in daily activities?1.51.2204
Is life becoming less enjoyable?1.61.3204
Incapable of functioning?1.71.3204
Table 2. Descriptive results for the 7 factors of the OHIP-14 questionnaire.
Table 2. Descriptive results for the 7 factors of the OHIP-14 questionnaire.
FactorsMeanSDMedianMinimumMaximum
Functional limitation2.42.1208
Physical pain3.02.1307
Psychological discomfort4.32.4508
Physical disability3.22.5408
Psychological disability2.32.1206
Social disability2.62.1308
Handicap3.22.5408
Overall score21.014.822050
Table 3. Descriptive results for the 8 questions of the OIDP questionnaire.
Table 3. Descriptive results for the 8 questions of the OIDP questionnaire.
In the Past 6 Months, “How Often have Problems “with Your Mouth, Teeth, or Dentures Have Caused You Difficulty in:MeanStandard DeviationMedianMinimumMaximum
Eating and enjoying food?1.81.7104
Speaking clearly?1.31.6004
Brushing your teeth or dentures?1.71.7104
Sleeping and relaxing?1.51.6104
Smiling and showing your teeth without embarrassment?2.11.8204
Your mood?2.11.8204
Performing your job and social role?1.81.8104
Enjoying social interactions with others?1.81.8104
Table 4. Relationships between demographic characteristics and OHIP-14 score.
Table 4. Relationships between demographic characteristics and OHIP-14 score.
CharacteristicMean ScoreStandard Deviationp-Value
Gender 0.04 a
Women19.614.7
Men22.714.8
Age0.6 b<0.001 b
Nationality 0.01 a
Greek20.215.1
Other25.112.4
Educational level−0.5 c<0.001 c
Employment status <0.001 a
Employed16.913.3
Unemployed30.114.0
Reason for dental visit <0.001 a
Due to a problem29.511.3
Routine check-up6.77.1
Self-perceived oral health−0.8 c<0.001 c
Halitosis (Bad breath) <0.001 a
No18.814.2
Yes32.412.5
Self-perceived oral appearance−0.6 c<0.001 c
DMFT Index0.4 c<0.001 c
Missing teeth <0.001 a
<1216.513.3
≥1236.47.8
Periodontal condition−0.3 c<0.001 c
Prosthetic restoration <0.001 a
No15.814.5
Yes26.613.1
a: Independent t-test, b: Pearson’s correlation coefficient, c: Spearman’s correlation coefficient.
Table 5. Multivariable linear regression with OHIP-14 score as the dependent variable.
Table 5. Multivariable linear regression with OHIP-14 score as the dependent variable.
Variableb Coefficient95% Confidence Interval for bp-Value
Dental visit due to a problem vs. routine check-up12.610.2 to 15.1<0.001
Self-perceived oral health−4.9−6.9 to −2.9<0.001
Self-perceived oral appearance−2.7−4.2 to −1.2<0.001
≥12 missing teeth vs. <12 missing teeth5.73.1 to 8.3<0.001
Prosthetic restoration4.42.6 to 6.0<0.001
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Thanasi, E.; Antoniadou, M.; Galanis, P.; Kapaki, V. A Cross-Sectional Assessment of Oral Health and Quality of Life Among Dental Patients at a Public Special Care Center in Greece: A Cross-Sectional Study. Hygiene 2026, 6, 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/hygiene6010004

AMA Style

Thanasi E, Antoniadou M, Galanis P, Kapaki V. A Cross-Sectional Assessment of Oral Health and Quality of Life Among Dental Patients at a Public Special Care Center in Greece: A Cross-Sectional Study. Hygiene. 2026; 6(1):4. https://doi.org/10.3390/hygiene6010004

Chicago/Turabian Style

Thanasi, Eirini, Maria Antoniadou, Petros Galanis, and Vasiliki Kapaki. 2026. "A Cross-Sectional Assessment of Oral Health and Quality of Life Among Dental Patients at a Public Special Care Center in Greece: A Cross-Sectional Study" Hygiene 6, no. 1: 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/hygiene6010004

APA Style

Thanasi, E., Antoniadou, M., Galanis, P., & Kapaki, V. (2026). A Cross-Sectional Assessment of Oral Health and Quality of Life Among Dental Patients at a Public Special Care Center in Greece: A Cross-Sectional Study. Hygiene, 6(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/hygiene6010004

Article Metrics

Article metric data becomes available approximately 24 hours after publication online.
Back to TopTop