Background/Objectives: This study estimated oral-health-related quality-of-life impacts and explored their associations with sociodemographic, dental, prosthetic, and dental-service-use characteristics among adults with direct or indirect Pomeranian ancestry living in a rural community. Methods: A community-based cross-sectional study included 300 adults interviewed mainly at home in the Melgaço district, Domingos Martins, Espírito Santo, Brazil, from May to August 2024. Participants were recruited through a non-probabilistic convenience approach selected to support participation in this close-knit rural setting. Recruitment was facilitated by a resident trusted by the community. The Brazilian OHIP-14 and a structured questionnaire were administered predominantly in Portuguese, with oral explanations in Pomeranian when needed. Responses of ‘often’ or ‘always’ indicated impact; a domain was considered impacted when at least one of its two items met this threshold, and overall impact was defined as at least one of the 14 items rated ‘often’ or ‘always’. Exploratory associations were assessed using central two-sided exact tests and conditional odds ratios with exact 95% confidence intervals; the analyses were unadjusted. Results: Overall oral health impact was reported by 68 participants (22.7%). The most frequent domain impacts were psychological discomfort (13.0%), physical pain (12.3%), and psychological disability (12.0%). Patterns of association were observed for age, dental status, perceived prosthetic need, dental-service access, and urgent dental attendance, with the precision of some estimates reflecting the small number of observations in specific cells. Conclusions: The findings provide an initial profile of oral-health-related quality of life in this rural Pomeranian community and identify characteristics that may be relevant to culturally responsive service planning. Within the community-based cross-sectional framework and the exploratory unadjusted analysis, the observed patterns offer a useful foundation for future adjusted and population-based investigations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Maria et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: