M Rosenberg1, A Kozlovsky, Y Wind, E Mindel. 1. Department of Oral Biology, Maurice and Gabriela Goldschleger School of Dental Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Ramat Aviv, Israel. melros@post.tau.ac.il
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In an initial study, subjects complaining of bad breath were generally unable to score the level of their own oral malodor in an objective fashion. Subjects were taught several techniques for self-measurement of bad breath. One year following the initial consultation, subjects were recalled to determine whether their ability to assess their own oral malodor had improved. METHOD AND MATERIALS: In the study, subjects were blinded to their own scores 1 year earlier, to the odor-judge scores, and to the results of the clinical laboratory tests. Thirty-two of 43 subjects in the original study who presented with a complaint of oral malodor agreed to participate in the follow-up study. Odor-judge scores and self-assessments of oral malodor (whole-mouth odor, tongue odor, and saliva odor) were compared with one another as well as with clinical parameters. RESULTS: Objective improvements were noted in both oral health parameters and malodor levels of subjects. Despite this, self-assessments generally remained unrelated to objective parameters (odor-judge scores, clinical indices, and laboratory tests). Self-assessments were all significantly correlated with one another, and also were significantly associated with corresponding self-estimates made 1 year earlier. CONCLUSION: Subjects with a complaint of oral malodor remain largely unable to score their own bad breath in an objective fashion. In addition, they are not capable of sensing reductions in oral malodor 1 year following the original assessment, even though, from a clinical standpoint, improvements have taken place.
OBJECTIVE: In an initial study, subjects complaining of bad breath were generally unable to score the level of their own oral malodor in an objective fashion. Subjects were taught several techniques for self-measurement of bad breath. One year following the initial consultation, subjects were recalled to determine whether their ability to assess their own oral malodor had improved. METHOD AND MATERIALS: In the study, subjects were blinded to their own scores 1 year earlier, to the odor-judge scores, and to the results of the clinical laboratory tests. Thirty-two of 43 subjects in the original study who presented with a complaint of oral malodor agreed to participate in the follow-up study. Odor-judge scores and self-assessments of oral malodor (whole-mouth odor, tongue odor, and saliva odor) were compared with one another as well as with clinical parameters. RESULTS: Objective improvements were noted in both oral health parameters and malodor levels of subjects. Despite this, self-assessments generally remained unrelated to objective parameters (odor-judge scores, clinical indices, and laboratory tests). Self-assessments were all significantly correlated with one another, and also were significantly associated with corresponding self-estimates made 1 year earlier. CONCLUSION: Subjects with a complaint of oral malodor remain largely unable to score their own bad breath in an objective fashion. In addition, they are not capable of sensing reductions in oral malodor 1 year following the original assessment, even though, from a clinical standpoint, improvements have taken place.
Authors: Franziska Struch; Christian Schwahn; Henri Wallaschofski; Hans J Grabe; Henry Völzke; Markus M Lerch; Peter Meisel; Thomas Kocher Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2008-01-15 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Diego Dantas Lopes Dos Santos; João Felipe Besegato; Sâmmea Martins Vieira; Andrea Abi Rached Dantas; Aryvelto Miranda Silva; Alexandre Monteiro da Silva Journal: J Indian Soc Periodontol Date: 2021-08-30