ArticleScientific reports2024
Piloting an intraoral pH device to track gastroesophageal reflux in adults.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study evaluated in vivo, an intraoral device against the gold standard esophageal device for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) monitoring. Subjects scheduled for a catheter-based esophageal pH/impedance testing at a gastroenterology clinic were recruited. They were screened using the GerdQ questionnaire, demographics and dental conditions recorded. A prototype intraoral device, consisting of a Bravo™ capsule embedded in an Essix-style retainer fabricated for each subject, monitored intraoral pH. Concurrently, subjects underwent 24-h esophageal pH-impedance monitoring. A self-administered survey elicited the comfort and acceptance of both devices. The study recruited ten adult subjects (23 to 60-years-old) with a median GerdQ score of 9.5 corresponding to a 79% likelihood of GERD. Subjects with severe dental erosion had significantly (p < 0.05) higher acid exposure time and more non-meal reflux events. No adverse events were associated with the intraoral device while one was recorded for the esophageal device. The intraoral device was significantly more comfortable to place, more comfortable to wear, and interfered less with daily routine compared to the esophageal device. Accuracy of the intraoral device ranged between 86.15% and 37.82%. Being more tolerable than traditional esophageal pH monitoring, intraoral pH monitoring may be a useful adjunct for the diagnosis and management of GERD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.