Observational studyClinical oral investigations2021
Patient perception after oral biopsies: an observational outpatient study.
Observational study in Clinical oral investigations, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of immediate photobiomodulation on pain and inflammation after oral biopsy: A randomized clinical study.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Trial
- Clinical Utility of Small Extracellular Vesicles as Liquid Biopsy for Oral Mucosal Disease Diagnostics: Emerging Perspectives.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Quantitative assessment of biomechanical changes in oral lesions at different cancerous stages using optical coherence elastography.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Oral Mucosa Capillaroscopy: A Narrative Review.Cancers · 2024Review
- Multispectral fluorescence imaging of EGFR and PD-L1 for precision detection of oral squamous cell carcinoma: a preclinical and clinical study.BMC medicine · 2024Article
- Oral and periodontal manifestation related during human papilloma virus infections: Update on early prognostic factors.Heliyon · 2024Review
- Identifying patient perceived values during outpatient encounters: an empirical study from Chinese public hospitals.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Identification of Metabolism-Associated Biomarkers for Early and Precise Diagnosis of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Biomolecules · 2022Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the postoperative course in patients undergoing oral mucosal biopsies, considering clinical and patient's perception variables potentially correlated to poor healing. SUBJECTS AND
methodsEighty patients underwent oral biopsies. All the variables connected with the surgery were recorded, and the harvested volume was calculated through image software (ImageJ, NIH, Betesda, USA). To evaluate the postoperative discomfort, the OHIP-14 and the numeric rating scale of pain (NRS) were administered at 6 h, 7 days and 21 days after biopsy.
resultsSix hours after the biopsy, 22 (OHIP-14 ≥ 20) and 24 (NRS ≥ 4) patients experienced a troublesome or painful healing, respectively. A significant statistical correlation between poor healing and high scores of NRS and OHIP was detected (Pearson's correlation test p < 0.05). Higher values of OHIP-14 were correlated to the type of lesion (OR = 1.165; p < 0.05), whereas high values of NRS were correlated to the use of systemic drugs (p < 0.05). No surgical variable had a significant statistical correlation with any of the outcomes.
conclusionsThe clinical evaluation was correlated with the patient's perception of pain and discomfort. This finding could be suggestive of the fact that wound healing can be reliably monitored with the help of these tools. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Patient perception can be a predictor of the healing of biopsied tissues.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33704571What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.