Loading…

Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice?

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 studi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of applied oral science 2017-09, Vol.25 (5), p.559-565
Main Authors: Falcão, Denise Pinheiro, Miranda, Priscila Carvalho, Almeida, Tayana Filgueira Galdino, Scalco, Monique Gomes da Silva, Fregni, Felipe, Amorim, Rivadávio Fernandes Batista de
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-fb34fa0eea3790baa0e0435aa811de026ee8395456f1a1d83b55b9282fd08f963
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-fb34fa0eea3790baa0e0435aa811de026ee8395456f1a1d83b55b9282fd08f963
container_end_page 565
container_issue 5
container_start_page 559
container_title Journal of applied oral science
container_volume 25
creator Falcão, Denise Pinheiro
Miranda, Priscila Carvalho
Almeida, Tayana Filgueira Galdino
Scalco, Monique Gomes da Silva
Fregni, Felipe
Amorim, Rivadávio Fernandes Batista de
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. 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. 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. 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. 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.
doi_str_mv 10.1590/1678-7757-2016-0305
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_eef5c2132ff84dcd8190d679d71d31ca</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><scielo_id>S1678_77572017000500559</scielo_id><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_eef5c2132ff84dcd8190d679d71d31ca</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>1956086570</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-fb34fa0eea3790baa0e0435aa811de026ee8395456f1a1d83b55b9282fd08f963</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVUk1v1DAQjRCIlsIvQEI-cslix-skvoBWFR-VKnEAztbEHne9cuLFdlrtP-Hn4nSXFZUseWbs9-aN3lTVW0ZXTEj6gbVdX3ed6OqGsramnIpn1eWp2orn51h0F9WrlHaU8oZ38mV10UjaSibWl9WfTUqY0ohTJsGSvEUCWs8R9GHJ9yFmGDySMUwuh5iIDZFswZckuUTwHvwM2YWJuImkedihzok8uLwNcyYj-GAKQIdx78FNeUU2EZcuBxLRu0fqhVF7NzkNnuxL5-w0fnpdvbDgE7453VfVry-ff15_q2-_f7253tzWWjCaazvwtQWKCGUyOkAJ6ZoLgJ4xg7RpEXsuxVq0lgEzPR-EGGTTN9bQ3sqWX1U3R14TYKf20Y0QDyqAU4-FEO8UxKLIo0K0QjeMN9b2a6NNzyQ1bSdNxwxnGgrX6siVtEMf1C7McSri1Y_FCbU4UazqKKWiHCEL4OMRsJ-HEY0uLkTwT1Q8fZncVt2FeyX6MqXkheD9iSCG3zOmrEaXNHoPE4Y5KSZFS_tWdLR85cevOoaUItpzG0bVslDqLFItC6WWhSqod_8rPGP-bRD_C_xPyKw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1956086570</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice?</title><source>SciELO Brazil</source><source>PubMed Central(OpenAccess)</source><source>IngentaConnect Journals</source><creator>Falcão, Denise Pinheiro ; Miranda, Priscila Carvalho ; Almeida, Tayana Filgueira Galdino ; Scalco, Monique Gomes da Silva ; Fregni, Felipe ; Amorim, Rivadávio Fernandes Batista de</creator><creatorcontrib>Falcão, Denise Pinheiro ; Miranda, Priscila Carvalho ; Almeida, Tayana Filgueira Galdino ; Scalco, Monique Gomes da Silva ; Fregni, Felipe ; Amorim, Rivadávio Fernandes Batista de</creatorcontrib><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. 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. 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. 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. 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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1678-7757</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1678-7765</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1678-7765</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1678-7757</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1590/1678-7757-2016-0305</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29069154</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Brazil: Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Breath Tests - instrumentation ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Dentistry ; DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY &amp; MEDICINE ; Diagnosis ; Diagnostic Equipment - standards ; Female ; Halitosis ; Halitosis - diagnosis ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Observer Variation ; Original ; Reference Standards ; Reproducibility of Results ; Sensation ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Sulfur Compounds - analysis ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>Journal of applied oral science, 2017-09, Vol.25 (5), p.559-565</ispartof><rights>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-fb34fa0eea3790baa0e0435aa811de026ee8395456f1a1d83b55b9282fd08f963</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-fb34fa0eea3790baa0e0435aa811de026ee8395456f1a1d83b55b9282fd08f963</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5804393/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5804393/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,24150,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29069154$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Falcão, Denise Pinheiro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miranda, Priscila Carvalho</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Almeida, Tayana Filgueira Galdino</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scalco, Monique Gomes da Silva</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fregni, Felipe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amorim, Rivadávio Fernandes Batista de</creatorcontrib><title>Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice?</title><title>Journal of applied oral science</title><addtitle>J Appl Oral Sci</addtitle><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. 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. 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. 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. 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.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Breath Tests - instrumentation</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY &amp; MEDICINE</subject><subject>Diagnosis</subject><subject>Diagnostic Equipment - standards</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Halitosis</subject><subject>Halitosis - diagnosis</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Observer Variation</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Reference Standards</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Sensation</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Sulfur Compounds - analysis</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>1678-7757</issn><issn>1678-7765</issn><issn>1678-7765</issn><issn>1678-7757</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNpVUk1v1DAQjRCIlsIvQEI-cslix-skvoBWFR-VKnEAztbEHne9cuLFdlrtP-Hn4nSXFZUseWbs9-aN3lTVW0ZXTEj6gbVdX3ed6OqGsramnIpn1eWp2orn51h0F9WrlHaU8oZ38mV10UjaSibWl9WfTUqY0ohTJsGSvEUCWs8R9GHJ9yFmGDySMUwuh5iIDZFswZckuUTwHvwM2YWJuImkedihzok8uLwNcyYj-GAKQIdx78FNeUU2EZcuBxLRu0fqhVF7NzkNnuxL5-w0fnpdvbDgE7453VfVry-ff15_q2-_f7253tzWWjCaazvwtQWKCGUyOkAJ6ZoLgJ4xg7RpEXsuxVq0lgEzPR-EGGTTN9bQ3sqWX1U3R14TYKf20Y0QDyqAU4-FEO8UxKLIo0K0QjeMN9b2a6NNzyQ1bSdNxwxnGgrX6siVtEMf1C7McSri1Y_FCbU4UazqKKWiHCEL4OMRsJ-HEY0uLkTwT1Q8fZncVt2FeyX6MqXkheD9iSCG3zOmrEaXNHoPE4Y5KSZFS_tWdLR85cevOoaUItpzG0bVslDqLFItC6WWhSqod_8rPGP-bRD_C_xPyKw</recordid><startdate>20170901</startdate><enddate>20170901</enddate><creator>Falcão, Denise Pinheiro</creator><creator>Miranda, Priscila Carvalho</creator><creator>Almeida, Tayana Filgueira Galdino</creator><creator>Scalco, Monique Gomes da Silva</creator><creator>Fregni, Felipe</creator><creator>Amorim, Rivadávio Fernandes Batista de</creator><general>Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP</general><general>University of São Paulo</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>GPN</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170901</creationdate><title>Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice?</title><author>Falcão, Denise Pinheiro ; Miranda, Priscila Carvalho ; Almeida, Tayana Filgueira Galdino ; Scalco, Monique Gomes da Silva ; Fregni, Felipe ; Amorim, Rivadávio Fernandes Batista de</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-fb34fa0eea3790baa0e0435aa811de026ee8395456f1a1d83b55b9282fd08f963</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Breath Tests - instrumentation</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY &amp; MEDICINE</topic><topic>Diagnosis</topic><topic>Diagnostic Equipment - standards</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Halitosis</topic><topic>Halitosis - diagnosis</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Observer Variation</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Reference Standards</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Sensation</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Sulfur Compounds - analysis</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Falcão, Denise Pinheiro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miranda, Priscila Carvalho</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Almeida, Tayana Filgueira Galdino</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scalco, Monique Gomes da Silva</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fregni, Felipe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Amorim, Rivadávio Fernandes Batista de</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>SciELO</collection><collection>Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Journal of applied oral science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Falcão, Denise Pinheiro</au><au>Miranda, Priscila Carvalho</au><au>Almeida, Tayana Filgueira Galdino</au><au>Scalco, Monique Gomes da Silva</au><au>Fregni, Felipe</au><au>Amorim, Rivadávio Fernandes Batista de</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of applied oral science</jtitle><addtitle>J Appl Oral Sci</addtitle><date>2017-09-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>25</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>559</spage><epage>565</epage><pages>559-565</pages><issn>1678-7757</issn><issn>1678-7765</issn><eissn>1678-7765</eissn><eissn>1678-7757</eissn><abstract>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. 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. 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. 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. 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.</abstract><cop>Brazil</cop><pub>Faculdade De Odontologia De Bauru - USP</pub><pmid>29069154</pmid><doi>10.1590/1678-7757-2016-0305</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1678-7757
ispartof Journal of applied oral science, 2017-09, Vol.25 (5), p.559-565
issn 1678-7757
1678-7765
1678-7765
1678-7757
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_eef5c2132ff84dcd8190d679d71d31ca
source SciELO Brazil; PubMed Central(OpenAccess); IngentaConnect Journals
subjects Adult
Aged
Breath Tests - instrumentation
Cross-Sectional Studies
Dentistry
DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Diagnosis
Diagnostic Equipment - standards
Female
Halitosis
Halitosis - diagnosis
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Observer Variation
Original
Reference Standards
Reproducibility of Results
Sensation
Sensitivity and Specificity
Sulfur Compounds - analysis
Time Factors
title Assessment of the accuracy of portable monitors for halitosis evaluation in subjects without malodor complaint. Are they reliable for clinical practice?
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T19%3A56%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Assessment%20of%20the%20accuracy%20of%20portable%20monitors%20for%20halitosis%20evaluation%20in%20subjects%20without%20malodor%20complaint.%20Are%20they%20reliable%20for%20clinical%20practice?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20applied%20oral%20science&rft.au=Falc%C3%A3o,%20Denise%20Pinheiro&rft.date=2017-09-01&rft.volume=25&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=559&rft.epage=565&rft.pages=559-565&rft.issn=1678-7757&rft.eissn=1678-7765&rft_id=info:doi/10.1590/1678-7757-2016-0305&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_doaj_%3E1956086570%3C/proquest_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-fb34fa0eea3790baa0e0435aa811de026ee8395456f1a1d83b55b9282fd08f963%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1956086570&rft_id=info:pmid/29069154&rft_scielo_id=S1678_77572017000500559&rfr_iscdi=true