Subjective suffering due to oral diseases and disorders has been conceptualized as oral health-related quality of life and is often assessed with a multidimensional version of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP). In the current study, a secondary analysis of a Dutch-language translated version of the original OHIP-14 was performed in different samples of approximately 1000 participants from diverse contexts (i.e., the Netherlands, the Caribbean, and Nepal). The dimensional structure and reliability of the scales resulting from these analyses were also examined. Based on a number of Confirmatory Factor Analyses (CFA) and Simultaneous Components Analysis (SCA) of the OHIP-14 scale, testing various models with different numbers of factors, several models were acceptable, but a two-factor solution, comprising psychological discomfort and physical discomfort was the most satisfactory in all three samples although a one-factor solution, oral discomfort was also acceptable. Instead of using a large number of dimensions with few items each, as often is done, it is most adequate and feasible to use no more than two scales, i.e., psychological discomfort and physical discomfort, comprising 11 items in total. These subscales of 6 and respectively, 5 items are not only statistically, but also theoretically the most adequate. Additionally, all items together, i.e., oral discomfort as a one-dimensional scale are useful and easy to apply for practical use.