The OralChroma TM CHM-2: a comparison with the OralChroma TM CHM-1

Already decades ago, the diagnosis of halitosis was facilitated with the arrival of chair-side instruments to score the breath odor. These devices are used for a more objective assessment of halitosis compared with organoleptic scoring, but these too have their disadvantages. To overcome some of the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical oral investigations 2020-01
Hauptverfasser: Laleman, I, Dekeyser, C, Wylleman, A, Teughels, W, Quirynen, M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page
container_title Clinical oral investigations
container_volume
creator Laleman, I
Dekeyser, C
Wylleman, A
Teughels, W
Quirynen, M
description Already decades ago, the diagnosis of halitosis was facilitated with the arrival of chair-side instruments to score the breath odor. These devices are used for a more objective assessment of halitosis compared with organoleptic scoring, but these too have their disadvantages. To overcome some of the drawbacks of the original model of the OralChroma (CHM-1), few years ago a second generation of this machine (CHM-2) was introduced. This study compared both devices in a clinical setting. All records of the patients visiting a specialized halitosis consultation over a period of 5 years (2012-2017) were examined. The correlations of the OralChroma CHM-1 and CHM-2 with the organoleptic and Halimeter® measurements were analyzed. Additionally the sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predicted values were calculated. A total of 581 data points were included (CHM-1: 292, CHM-2: 289). The correlations between both models with the organoleptic measurements were not statistically significant different. The CHM-2 seemed superior to the CHM-1 in the quantification of dimethyl sulfide with a detection rate of 95% and 61%, respectively. Additionally, the CHM-2 was significantly more sensitive for dimethyl sulfide than the CHM-1. However the latter showed in turn a better sensitivity for hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan. The CHM-2 showed a better sensitivity for dimethyl sulfide than its predecessor. However, its sensitivity for hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan was worse. Dimethyl sulfide is the main volatile implicated in extra-oral blood-borne halitosis, this makes the OralChroma CHM-2 the instrument of choice when this is suspected.
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>pubmed</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmed_primary_31950293</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>31950293</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-pubmed_primary_319502933</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpjYuA0NDE20zU2NzfkYOAqLs4yMDA0MTM3ZmfgMDa0NDUwsjTmZHAKyUhV8C9KzHHOKMrPTVQI8VVw9vDVNbJSSFRIzs8tSCzKLM7PUyjPLMlQKMGq1JCHgTUtMac4lRdKczPIubmGOHvoFpQm5aamxBcUZeYmFlXGwyw1JqgAAOkDNCo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Index Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>The OralChroma TM CHM-2: a comparison with the OralChroma TM CHM-1</title><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><creator>Laleman, I ; Dekeyser, C ; Wylleman, A ; Teughels, W ; Quirynen, M</creator><creatorcontrib>Laleman, I ; Dekeyser, C ; Wylleman, A ; Teughels, W ; Quirynen, M</creatorcontrib><description>Already decades ago, the diagnosis of halitosis was facilitated with the arrival of chair-side instruments to score the breath odor. These devices are used for a more objective assessment of halitosis compared with organoleptic scoring, but these too have their disadvantages. To overcome some of the drawbacks of the original model of the OralChroma (CHM-1), few years ago a second generation of this machine (CHM-2) was introduced. This study compared both devices in a clinical setting. All records of the patients visiting a specialized halitosis consultation over a period of 5 years (2012-2017) were examined. The correlations of the OralChroma CHM-1 and CHM-2 with the organoleptic and Halimeter® measurements were analyzed. Additionally the sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predicted values were calculated. A total of 581 data points were included (CHM-1: 292, CHM-2: 289). The correlations between both models with the organoleptic measurements were not statistically significant different. The CHM-2 seemed superior to the CHM-1 in the quantification of dimethyl sulfide with a detection rate of 95% and 61%, respectively. Additionally, the CHM-2 was significantly more sensitive for dimethyl sulfide than the CHM-1. However the latter showed in turn a better sensitivity for hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan. The CHM-2 showed a better sensitivity for dimethyl sulfide than its predecessor. However, its sensitivity for hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan was worse. Dimethyl sulfide is the main volatile implicated in extra-oral blood-borne halitosis, this makes the OralChroma CHM-2 the instrument of choice when this is suspected.</description><identifier>EISSN: 1436-3771</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31950293</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Germany</publisher><ispartof>Clinical oral investigations, 2020-01</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0000-0001-9662-8238</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31950293$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Laleman, I</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dekeyser, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wylleman, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Teughels, W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quirynen, M</creatorcontrib><title>The OralChroma TM CHM-2: a comparison with the OralChroma TM CHM-1</title><title>Clinical oral investigations</title><addtitle>Clin Oral Investig</addtitle><description>Already decades ago, the diagnosis of halitosis was facilitated with the arrival of chair-side instruments to score the breath odor. These devices are used for a more objective assessment of halitosis compared with organoleptic scoring, but these too have their disadvantages. To overcome some of the drawbacks of the original model of the OralChroma (CHM-1), few years ago a second generation of this machine (CHM-2) was introduced. This study compared both devices in a clinical setting. All records of the patients visiting a specialized halitosis consultation over a period of 5 years (2012-2017) were examined. The correlations of the OralChroma CHM-1 and CHM-2 with the organoleptic and Halimeter® measurements were analyzed. Additionally the sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predicted values were calculated. A total of 581 data points were included (CHM-1: 292, CHM-2: 289). The correlations between both models with the organoleptic measurements were not statistically significant different. The CHM-2 seemed superior to the CHM-1 in the quantification of dimethyl sulfide with a detection rate of 95% and 61%, respectively. Additionally, the CHM-2 was significantly more sensitive for dimethyl sulfide than the CHM-1. However the latter showed in turn a better sensitivity for hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan. The CHM-2 showed a better sensitivity for dimethyl sulfide than its predecessor. However, its sensitivity for hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan was worse. Dimethyl sulfide is the main volatile implicated in extra-oral blood-borne halitosis, this makes the OralChroma CHM-2 the instrument of choice when this is suspected.</description><issn>1436-3771</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpjYuA0NDE20zU2NzfkYOAqLs4yMDA0MTM3ZmfgMDa0NDUwsjTmZHAKyUhV8C9KzHHOKMrPTVQI8VVw9vDVNbJSSFRIzs8tSCzKLM7PUyjPLMlQKMGq1JCHgTUtMac4lRdKczPIubmGOHvoFpQm5aamxBcUZeYmFlXGwyw1JqgAAOkDNCo</recordid><startdate>20200116</startdate><enddate>20200116</enddate><creator>Laleman, I</creator><creator>Dekeyser, C</creator><creator>Wylleman, A</creator><creator>Teughels, W</creator><creator>Quirynen, M</creator><scope>NPM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9662-8238</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200116</creationdate><title>The OralChroma TM CHM-2: a comparison with the OralChroma TM CHM-1</title><author>Laleman, I ; Dekeyser, C ; Wylleman, A ; Teughels, W ; Quirynen, M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-pubmed_primary_319502933</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Laleman, I</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dekeyser, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wylleman, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Teughels, W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quirynen, M</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><jtitle>Clinical oral investigations</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Laleman, I</au><au>Dekeyser, C</au><au>Wylleman, A</au><au>Teughels, W</au><au>Quirynen, M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The OralChroma TM CHM-2: a comparison with the OralChroma TM CHM-1</atitle><jtitle>Clinical oral investigations</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Oral Investig</addtitle><date>2020-01-16</date><risdate>2020</risdate><eissn>1436-3771</eissn><abstract>Already decades ago, the diagnosis of halitosis was facilitated with the arrival of chair-side instruments to score the breath odor. These devices are used for a more objective assessment of halitosis compared with organoleptic scoring, but these too have their disadvantages. To overcome some of the drawbacks of the original model of the OralChroma (CHM-1), few years ago a second generation of this machine (CHM-2) was introduced. This study compared both devices in a clinical setting. All records of the patients visiting a specialized halitosis consultation over a period of 5 years (2012-2017) were examined. The correlations of the OralChroma CHM-1 and CHM-2 with the organoleptic and Halimeter® measurements were analyzed. Additionally the sensitivity, specificity, and negative and positive predicted values were calculated. A total of 581 data points were included (CHM-1: 292, CHM-2: 289). The correlations between both models with the organoleptic measurements were not statistically significant different. The CHM-2 seemed superior to the CHM-1 in the quantification of dimethyl sulfide with a detection rate of 95% and 61%, respectively. Additionally, the CHM-2 was significantly more sensitive for dimethyl sulfide than the CHM-1. However the latter showed in turn a better sensitivity for hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan. The CHM-2 showed a better sensitivity for dimethyl sulfide than its predecessor. However, its sensitivity for hydrogen sulfide and methyl mercaptan was worse. Dimethyl sulfide is the main volatile implicated in extra-oral blood-borne halitosis, this makes the OralChroma CHM-2 the instrument of choice when this is suspected.</abstract><cop>Germany</cop><pmid>31950293</pmid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9662-8238</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier EISSN: 1436-3771
ispartof Clinical oral investigations, 2020-01
issn 1436-3771
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmed_primary_31950293
source SpringerNature Journals
title The OralChroma TM CHM-2: a comparison with the OralChroma TM CHM-1
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-22T14%3A13%3A43IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-pubmed&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20OralChroma%20TM%20CHM-2:%20a%20comparison%20with%20the%20OralChroma%20TM%20CHM-1&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20oral%20investigations&rft.au=Laleman,%20I&rft.date=2020-01-16&rft.eissn=1436-3771&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cpubmed%3E31950293%3C/pubmed%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/31950293&rfr_iscdi=true