TY - JOUR
T1 - Self-assessment of oral malodor 1 year following initial consultation
AU - Rosenberg, Mel
AU - Kozlovsky, Avital
AU - Wind, Yuval
AU - Mindel, Eli
PY - 1999/5
Y1 - 1999/5
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - Halitosis
KW - Odor judge
KW - Oral malodor
KW - Self-assessment
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033122078&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - ???researchoutput.researchoutputtypes.contributiontojournal.article???
AN - SCOPUS:0033122078
SN - 0033-6572
VL - 30
SP - 324
EP - 327
JO - Quintessence International
JF - Quintessence International
IS - 5
ER -