Trial reportLasers in medical science2025
Prevention of pain and oral mucositis in patients undergoing chemotherapy through the use of a high-energy light source: A randomized clinical study.
Trial report in Lasers in medical science, 2025. 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose This study aimed to clinically evaluate the high-energy light-emitting device (Germinator) in preventing pain and oral mucositis in patients undergoing chemotherapy. Methods Sixty patients were selected, being randomly divided into two groups(n = 30), according to preventive protocol: G1(Lasertherapy)-conventional low-intensity red laser protocol; G2(Germinator)-protocol with high-energy light-emitting device. Before and after these protocols, the pain and oral mucositis degrees were recorded by visual analog scale(VAS) for pain and World Health Organization(WHO) classification for oral mucositis. The VAS was used to assess pain symptoms, where 0 represented the absence of pain and 10 the highest pain score. The oral mucositis scoring was performed according to the WHO classification: grade 0(none), grade I(oral soreness, erythema), grade II(oral erythema, ulcers, solid and liquid diet tolerated), grade III(oral ulcers, liquid diet only), and grade IV(oral alimentation impossible). Statistical analysis was performed by Mann-Whitney U test(α = 5%), in order to provide the intergroup comparison. Results The median (interquartile range-IQR) of pain score was 0.0(0.0-2.0) for G1 group(Lasertherapy), whereas it was 0.0(0.0-2.0) for G2 group(Germinator), revealing no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05). The median(minimum and maximum value) of the oral mucositis score was 0.0(0.0-1.0) for G1 group(Lasertherapy), whereas it was 0.0(0.0-1.0) for G2 group(Germinator), also revealing no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05). Both treatments proved equally effective in preventing and controlling these symptoms in patients undergoing chemotherapy, recognizing that no statistically significant difference was found between the two preventive modalities. Conclusions The high-energy light-emitting device(Germinator) appears promising in preventing pain and oral mucositis in patients undergoing chemotherapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41114890What 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.