↓ Skip to main content

Finding an upper limit of what might be achievable by patients: oral cleanliness in dental professionals after self-performed manual oral hygiene

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Oral Investigations, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#42 of 1,513)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
Finding an upper limit of what might be achievable by patients: oral cleanliness in dental professionals after self-performed manual oral hygiene
Published in
Clinical Oral Investigations, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00784-017-2160-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Renate Deinzer, René Schmidt, Daniela Harnacke, Jörg Meyle, Dirk Ziebolz, Thomas Hoffmann, Bernd Wöstmann

Abstract

Though patients have been shown to have difficulties in achieving oral cleanliness after self-performed oral hygiene, scientifically and empirically justified standards for the degree of oral cleanliness they should achieve are lacking. Oral cleanliness of dental staff was therefore assessed as an indicator of what might be an upper limit of what can be expected by patients. In a multicentre study, N = 64 university dentists, N = 33 dental students and N = 30 dental assistants were asked to perform manual oral hygiene to the best of their abilities. The presence or absence of dental plaque adjacent to gingival margins was assessed by the marginal plaque index (MPI). As full-crown index, the Turesky modification of the Quigley and Hein Index (QHIm) was applied. Only three participants showed papillary bleeding and only one a clinical pocket depth of more than 3.5 mm. After self-performed oral hygiene, no differences between groups were observed with respect to plaque nor did results differ between those who habitually used a powered toothbrush only and those who did not. Most participants (96%) achieved oral cleanliness at more than 70% of their gingival margins and QHIm levels below .63. Half of the participants showed QHIm levels below .17 and oral cleanliness at 96% of gingival margins. Considering that half of the dental professionals achieved oral cleanliness at 96% of gingival margins and QHIm levels below .17 after thorough oral hygiene, this might reflect an upper limit of what can be expected by patients.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 19%
Student > Master 2 10%
Librarian 1 5%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 10 48%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 14%
Unknown 10 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 29 June 2023.
All research outputs
#1,930,337
of 23,973,927 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Oral Investigations
#42
of 1,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,919
of 316,636 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Oral Investigations
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,973,927 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,513 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 316,636 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.