| Title |
Prediction of pain in orthodontic patients based on preoperative pain assessment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s101391 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Baoyu Zheng, Manman Ren, Feiou Lin, Linjie Yao |
| Abstract |
To investigate whether pretreatment assessment of experimental pain can predict the level of pain after archwire placement. One hundred and twenty-one general university students seeking orthodontic treatment were enrolled in this study. A cold pressor test was performed to estimate the pain tolerance of subjects before treatment. Self-reported pain intensity was calculated using a 10 cm visual analog scale during the 7 days after treatment. The relationship between pain tolerance and orthodontic pain was analyzed using Spearman's correlation analysis. The maximum mean level of pain intensity occurred at 24 hours after bonding (53.31±16.13) and fell to normal levels at day 7. Spearman's correlation analysis found a moderate positive association between preoperative pain tolerance and self-reported pain after archwire placement (P<0.01). There was no significant difference in pain intensity between male and female patients at any time point (P>0.05). A simple and noninvasive preoperative sensory test (the cold pressor test) was useful in predicting the risk of developing unbearable pain in patients after archwire placement. Self-reported pain after archwire placement decreased as individual pain tolerance increased. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 9 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 13% |
| Psychology | 2 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 4% |
| Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 10 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 March 2016.
All research outputs
#14,407,575
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#701
of 1,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,442
of 313,048 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#27
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,733 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,048 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.