| Title |
Effect of laser on pain relief and wound healing of recurrent aphthous stomatitis: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Lasers in Medical Science, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10103-017-2184-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Valerie G. A. Suter, Sophia Sjölund, Michael M. Bornstein |
| Abstract |
The aim of this systematic review was to assess a potential benefit of laser use in the treatment of recurrent aphthous stomatitis (RAS). The primary outcome variables were pain relief, duration of wound healing and reduction in episode frequency. A PICO approach was used as a search strategy in Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases. After scanning and excluding titles, abstracts and full texts, 11 studies (ten RCTs and one non-randomised controlled trial) were included. Study selection and data extraction was done by two observers. Study participants varied between 7-90 for the laser and 5-90 for the control groups. Laser treatment included Nd:YAG laser ablation, CO2 laser applied through a transparent gel (non-ablative) and diode laser in a low-level laser treatment (LLLT) mode. Control groups had placebo, no therapy or topical corticosteroid treatment. Significant pain relief immediately after treatment was found in five out of six studies. Pain relief in the days following treatment was recorded in seven studies. The duration of RAS wound healing was also reduced in five studies. However, criteria of evaluation differed between the studies. The episode frequency was not evaluated as only one study addressed this outcome parameter, but did not discriminate between the study (LLLT) and control (corticosteroid) groups. Jadad scores (ranging from 0 to 5) for quality assessment of the included studies range between 0 and 2 (mean = 1.0) for studies analysing pain relief and between 0 and 3 (mean = 1.1) for studies evaluating wound healing. The use of lasers (CO2 laser, Nd:YAG laser and diode laser) to relieve symptoms and promote healing of RAS is a therapeutic option. More studies for laser applications are necessary to demonstrate superiority over topical pharmaceutical treatment and to recommend a specific laser type, wavelength, power output and applied energy (ablative versus photobiomodulation). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 50% |
| Spain | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 166 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 166 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 13% |
| Researcher | 16 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 33 | 20% |
| Unknown | 59 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 67 | 40% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Engineering | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 15 | 9% |
| Unknown | 64 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 05 January 2023.
All research outputs
#4,335,977
of 23,495,502 outputs
Outputs from Lasers in Medical Science
#103
of 1,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,899
of 310,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lasers in Medical Science
#7
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,495,502 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,341 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 310,092 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 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 63% of its contemporaries.