Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2017 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Journal of applied oral science (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/140025 |
Resumo: | Halitosis is defined as a foul odor emanated from the oral cavity, with great impact in quality of life and social restraints. Recently, the use of Breath Alert™ in research increased significantly. Halimeter™, another portable device, is often used in clinical practice. Nevertheless, not many studies have verified the accuracy and compared the results of both devices simultaneously. Objective: To verify the accuracy of Breath Alert™ and Halimeter™ in patients without chief complaint of halitosis, using the organoleptic test (OT) as "gold standard." The second aim was to verify whether their concomitant use could enhance the diagnostic accuracy of halitosis. Material and Methods: A cross-sectional analytical study was performed. The quality of expired air of 34 subjects without chief complaint of halitosis was assessed. Two experienced examiners carried out the OT. Afterward, a third blinded examiner performed Halimeter™ (HT) and Breath Alert™ (BA) tests. Results: The OT identified halitosis in 21 subjects (62%). The area under the ROC curve (95% confidence interval) was 0.67 (0.48-0.85) and 0.54 (0.34-0.75) for HT and BA, respectively. The accuracy for HT and BA was 59% and 47%, respectively. The combined usage of HT and BA provided 11 positive results, being 9 subjects (43%) out of the total of 21 positive cases. Conclusions: Halimeter™ and Breath Alert™ were not able to diagnose halitosis in non-complainer subjects at the same level as the organoleptic examination, since their accuracy were low. Our results suggest that such portable devices are not reliable tools to assess halitosis and may neglect or misdiagnose a considerable number of patients in clinical practice. |
id |
USP-17_ea099154f978b8270d7fd341579282bb |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:revistas.usp.br:article/140025 |
network_acronym_str |
USP-17 |
network_name_str |
Journal of applied oral science (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice?HalitosisDiagnosis Halitosis is defined as a foul odor emanated from the oral cavity, with great impact in quality of life and social restraints. Recently, the use of Breath Alert™ in research increased significantly. Halimeter™, another portable device, is often used in clinical practice. Nevertheless, not many studies have verified the accuracy and compared the results of both devices simultaneously. Objective: To verify the accuracy of Breath Alert™ and Halimeter™ in patients without chief complaint of halitosis, using the organoleptic test (OT) as "gold standard." The second aim was to verify whether their concomitant use could enhance the diagnostic accuracy of halitosis. Material and Methods: A cross-sectional analytical study was performed. The quality of expired air of 34 subjects without chief complaint of halitosis was assessed. Two experienced examiners carried out the OT. Afterward, a third blinded examiner performed Halimeter™ (HT) and Breath Alert™ (BA) tests. Results: The OT identified halitosis in 21 subjects (62%). The area under the ROC curve (95% confidence interval) was 0.67 (0.48-0.85) and 0.54 (0.34-0.75) for HT and BA, respectively. The accuracy for HT and BA was 59% and 47%, respectively. The combined usage of HT and BA provided 11 positive results, being 9 subjects (43%) out of the total of 21 positive cases. Conclusions: Halimeter™ and Breath Alert™ were not able to diagnose halitosis in non-complainer subjects at the same level as the organoleptic examination, since their accuracy were low. Our results suggest that such portable devices are not reliable tools to assess halitosis and may neglect or misdiagnose a considerable number of patients in clinical practice.Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru2017-10-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/14002510.1590/1678-7757-2016-0305Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 25 No. 5 (2017); 559-565Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 25 Núm. 5 (2017); 559-565Journal of Applied Oral Science; v. 25 n. 5 (2017); 559-5651678-77651678-7757reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online)instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPenghttps://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/140025/135225Copyright (c) 2017 Journal of Applied Oral Scienceinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessFalcão, Denise PinheiroMiranda, Priscila CarvalhoAlmeida, Tayana Filgueira GaldinoScalco, Monique Gomes da SilvaFregni, FelipeAmorim, Rivadávio Fernandes Batista de2017-10-25T11:51:34Zoai:revistas.usp.br:article/140025Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/jaosPUBhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/oai||jaos@usp.br1678-77651678-7757opendoar:2017-10-25T11:51:34Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice? |
title |
Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice? |
spellingShingle |
Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice? Falcão, Denise Pinheiro Halitosis Diagnosis |
title_short |
Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice? |
title_full |
Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice? |
title_fullStr |
Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice? |
title_sort |
Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice? |
author |
Falcão, Denise Pinheiro |
author_facet |
Falcão, Denise Pinheiro Miranda, Priscila Carvalho Almeida, Tayana Filgueira Galdino Scalco, Monique Gomes da Silva Fregni, Felipe Amorim, Rivadávio Fernandes Batista de |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Miranda, Priscila Carvalho Almeida, Tayana Filgueira Galdino Scalco, Monique Gomes da Silva Fregni, Felipe Amorim, Rivadávio Fernandes Batista de |
author2_role |
author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Falcão, Denise Pinheiro Miranda, Priscila Carvalho Almeida, Tayana Filgueira Galdino Scalco, Monique Gomes da Silva Fregni, Felipe Amorim, Rivadávio Fernandes Batista de |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Halitosis Diagnosis |
topic |
Halitosis Diagnosis |
description |
Halitosis is defined as a foul odor emanated from the oral cavity, with great impact in quality of life and social restraints. Recently, the use of Breath Alert™ in research increased significantly. Halimeter™, another portable device, is often used in clinical practice. Nevertheless, not many studies have verified the accuracy and compared the results of both devices simultaneously. Objective: To verify the accuracy of Breath Alert™ and Halimeter™ in patients without chief complaint of halitosis, using the organoleptic test (OT) as "gold standard." The second aim was to verify whether their concomitant use could enhance the diagnostic accuracy of halitosis. Material and Methods: A cross-sectional analytical study was performed. The quality of expired air of 34 subjects without chief complaint of halitosis was assessed. Two experienced examiners carried out the OT. Afterward, a third blinded examiner performed Halimeter™ (HT) and Breath Alert™ (BA) tests. Results: The OT identified halitosis in 21 subjects (62%). The area under the ROC curve (95% confidence interval) was 0.67 (0.48-0.85) and 0.54 (0.34-0.75) for HT and BA, respectively. The accuracy for HT and BA was 59% and 47%, respectively. The combined usage of HT and BA provided 11 positive results, being 9 subjects (43%) out of the total of 21 positive cases. Conclusions: Halimeter™ and Breath Alert™ were not able to diagnose halitosis in non-complainer subjects at the same level as the organoleptic examination, since their accuracy were low. Our results suggest that such portable devices are not reliable tools to assess halitosis and may neglect or misdiagnose a considerable number of patients in clinical practice. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017-10-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/140025 10.1590/1678-7757-2016-0305 |
url |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/140025 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.1590/1678-7757-2016-0305 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/jaos/article/view/140025/135225 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2017 Journal of Applied Oral Science info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2017 Journal of Applied Oral Science |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 25 No. 5 (2017); 559-565 Journal of Applied Oral Science; Vol. 25 Núm. 5 (2017); 559-565 Journal of Applied Oral Science; v. 25 n. 5 (2017); 559-565 1678-7765 1678-7757 reponame:Journal of applied oral science (Online) instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP) instacron:USP |
instname_str |
Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
instacron_str |
USP |
institution |
USP |
reponame_str |
Journal of applied oral science (Online) |
collection |
Journal of applied oral science (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Journal of applied oral science (Online) - Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||jaos@usp.br |
_version_ |
1800221680440705024 |