Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41593123›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2026

Evaluation of low level laser therapy and lidocaine versus chlorohexidine for the management of traumatic oral ulcers in children: a randomized controlled study.

Maryam El Mansy, Mohamed Farouk Rashed

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07138586 (Evaluation of Low Level Laser Therapy and Lidocaine Versus Chlorhexidine for the Management of Traumatic Oral Ulcers in Children), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT07138586 nacompletednot on this map

Evaluation of Low Level Laser Therapy and Lidocaine Versus Chlorhexidine for the Management of Traumatic Oral Ulcers in Children: A Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorNational Research Centre, EgyptRan2025 to 2025Enrolled30ConditionsTraumatic Ulcer of Oral MucosaArmslow level laser therapy group, Lidocaine gel group, Chlorhexidine mouthwash group (positive control group).
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Maryam El MansyResearcher of Pediatric Dentistry, Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry Department, Oral and Dental Research Institute, National Research Centre, 33 El Buhouth St, Dokki, Giza, 12622, Egypt. mm.elmansy@nrc.sci.eg.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5395-1710
Mohamed Farouk RashedResearcher of Pediatric Dentistry, Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry Department, Oral and Dental Research Institute, National Research Centre, 33 El Buhouth St, Dokki, Giza, 12622, Egypt.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0254-5971

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of Low-Level Laser Therapy (LLLT), lidocaine (LC) gel, and chlorhexidine (CHX) mouthwash in the management of traumatic oral ulcers in children, with respect to ulcer size, pain relief and parental satisfaction. Thirty children aged 6-14 years with clinically diagnosed traumatic oral ulcers were randomly allocated into three groups (n = 10 each): Group I (LLLT), Group II (LC), and Group III (CHX). Ulcer size was measured using a calibrated periodontal probe, pain intensity was assessed with the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and parental satisfaction was evaluated using a Likert scale. Ulcer size reduction was greatest in Group I, followed by Group II and Group III, with statistically significant differences observed at day 5 (p = 0.0001) and day 7 (p = 0.0072). Group I also recorded the lowest VAS scores immediately, and at 2, 5, and 7 days (p = 0.0001) compared with the other groups. Parental satisfaction was significantly higher in the LLLT group compared with the LC and CHX groups (p = 0.006). LLLT demonstrated superior effectiveness in accelerating healing by reducing related size and pain in traumatic oral ulcers compared with LC gel and CHX mouthwash. Despite CHX being the standard approach for oral ulcer management, it showed the lowest efficacy. Parental acceptance of LLLT was high, with minimal discomfort related to treatment visits, supporting its potential as a favourable treatment modality in paediatric dental practice.Trial registration: On August 16, 2025, this study was retrospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov under the identification number NCT07138586 with URL; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT07138586 .

Indexed as

ChlorhexidineLidocaineLow-Level Light TherapyOral UlcerAdolescentAnesthetics, LocalChildFemaleHumansMaleMouthwashesPain ManagementPain MeasurementTreatment OutcomeAnesthetics, LocalChlorhexidineLidocaineMouthwashesChildrenCholorhexidineLidocaineLow level laser therapyOral ulcer

Identifiers

PMID41593123
PMCPMC12852096

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.