↓ Skip to main content

Oral health and orofacial pain in people with dementia admitted to acute hospital wards: observational cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
91 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Oral health and orofacial pain in people with dementia admitted to acute hospital wards: observational cohort study
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12877-018-0810-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liza J. M. van de Rijt, Roxane A. F. Weijenberg, Alexandra R. Feast, Victoria Vickerstaff, Frank Lobbezoo, Elizabeth L. Sampson

Abstract

Orofacial pain in people with dementia is difficult to detect, and often under-treated. Our aim was to investigate the prevalence of orofacial pain in people with dementia in acute hospitals in the UK. Secondary aims were to examine oral health status and explore associations between orofacial pain and oral health factors. This cross-sectional observational study was carried out in two UK hospitals. Using the Orofacial Pain Scale in Non-Verbal Individuals (OPS-NVI) to identify orofacial pain, 101 participants with dementia, admitted to acute medical wards, were observed for at least 3 min during rest and chewing. Verbal participants were then asked about presence of orofacial pain, using self-report pain scales. Finally, a brief oral assessment was performed. Orofacial pain, assessed with the OPS-NVI, was present in 11.9% (95% C.I. 5.9, 18.8) of participants at rest and 21.9% (95% C.I. 14.6, 31.3) whilst chewing. Participants who were no longer able to self-report pain were significantly more likely to experience orofacial pain. Oral health in both dentate and edentate participants was poor. Brush frequency, indication of chewing quality, consistency of the food, presence of extra-oral abnormalities, person who performed mouth care, and oral hygiene in dentate participants were significant predictors for the presence of orofacial pain. Improving oral care in acute hospital patients with dementia, particularly those who cannot self-report pain, may significantly reduce pain and suffering in this population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 91 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Researcher 8 8%
Student > Postgraduate 7 7%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 39 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 15%
Psychology 4 4%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Linguistics 1 1%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 41 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 71. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 May 2019.
All research outputs
#595,428
of 25,299,129 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#65
of 3,620 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,202
of 337,184 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#5
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,299,129 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,620 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 337,184 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.