↓ Skip to main content

Association between severe asthma and changes in the stomatognathic system

Overview of attention for article published in Jornal de Pneumologia, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Association between severe asthma and changes in the stomatognathic system
Published in
Jornal de Pneumologia, January 2016
DOI 10.1590/s1806-37562015000600006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mayra Carvalho-Oliveira, Cristina Salles, Regina Terse, Argemiro D'Oliveira

Abstract

To describe orofacial muscle function in patients with severe asthma. This was a descriptive study comparing patients with severe controlled asthma (SCA) and severe uncontrolled asthma (SUA). We selected 160 patients, who completed a sociodemographic questionnaire and the 6-item Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-6), as well as undergoing evaluation of orofacial muscle function. Of the 160 patients evaluated, 126 (78.8%) and 34 (21.2%) presented with SCA and SUA, respectively, as defined by the Global Initiative for Asthma criteria. Regardless of the level of asthma control, the most frequent changes found after evaluation of muscle function were difficulty in chewing, oronasal breathing pattern, below-average or poor dental arch condition, and difficulty in swallowing. When the sample was stratified by FEV1 (% of predicted), was significantly higher proportions of SUA group patients, compared with SCA group patients, showed habitual open-mouth chewing (24.8% vs. 7.7%; p < 0.02), difficulty in swallowing water (33.7% vs. 17.3%; p < 0.04), and voice problems (81.2% vs. 51.9%; p < 0.01). When the sample was stratified by ACQ-6 score, the proportion of patients showing difficulty in swallowing bread was significantly higher in the SUA group than in the SCA group (66.6% vs. 26.6%; p < 0.01). The prevalence of changes in the stomatognathic system appears to be high among adults with severe asthma, regardless of the level of asthma control. We found that some such changes were significantly more common in patients with SUA than in those with SCA. Descrever os achados da avaliação miofuncional orofacial em pacientes com asma grave. Estudo descritivo comparando pacientes com asma grave controlada (AGC) e asma grave não controlada (AGNC). Foram selecionados 160 participantes, que responderam a um questionário sociodemográfico e o Asthma Control Questionnaire com seis questões (ACQ-6) e realizaram avaliação miofuncional orofacial. Na amostra estudada, 126 (78,8%) e 34 (21,2%) pacientes, respectivamente, apresentavam AGC e AGNC segundo os critérios da Global Initiative for Asthma. Independentemente do nível de controle da asma grave, as alterações mais frequentes observadas na avaliação miofuncional foram problemas de mastigação, padrão de respiração oronasal, estado de conservação da arcada dentária médio ou ruim e problemas na deglutição. Quando a amostra foi estratificada pelo VEF1 (% do previsto), os resultados foram significativamente maiores no grupo AGNC que no grupo AGC quanto a mastigação habitual com boca aberta (24,8% vs. 7,7%; p < 0,02), deglutição de água com dificuldade (33,7% vs. 17,3%; p < 0,04) e problemas de voz (81,2% vs. 51,9%; p < 0,01). Quando estratificada pelo ACQ-6, os resultados do grupo AGNC foram significativamente maiores que no grupo AGC quanto à deglutição de pão com dificuldade (66,6% vs. 26,6%; p < 0,01). A prevalência de alterações do sistema estomatognático parece ser alta em adultos com asma grave independentemente do nível de controle da doença. No grupo AGNC, algumas dessas alterações foram significativamente mais frequentes que no grupo AGC.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Postgraduate 5 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Student > Master 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 14 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Linguistics 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 18 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 16 December 2018.
All research outputs
#15,228,078
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Jornal de Pneumologia
#237
of 719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,173
of 400,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Jornal de Pneumologia
#21
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 719 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 400,240 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 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 61% of its contemporaries.