Burning Mouth SyndromeNCT04034849
Effects of Photobiomodulation in Burning Mouth Syndrome
A study testing Photobiomodulation in people with Burning Mouth Syndrome, run by Rosa María López-Pintor Muñoz at 1 site in Spain.
Trial summary
The main objective of this study is to assess the effects of Photobiomodulation with Low-level Laser Therapy to the pain management in Burning Mouth Syndrome patients, besides assessing their impact on the different aspects of their quality of life, using the necessary questionnaires to evaluate all the outcomes of… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 31 to 85 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Burning Mouth Syndrome
- What is being tested?
- Photobiomodulation
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSpain
- Study dates
- 1 Apr 2018to 30 Jun 2019
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 31 to 85 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Adult patients older than 18 years of age who fulfilled the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-3) diagnostic criteria for Burning Mouth Syndrome Exclusion Criteria
- Patients not interested in participate in the study, unable to understand or answer the questionnaires and follow the appointments, patients suffering hiposialia or Sjögren's syndrome, patients who had received head and neck radiotherapy, pregnant women, patients with uncontrolled systemic diseases (diabetes, thyroid diseases, fibromyalgia or anemia) and patients suffering burning mouth symptoms secondary to local factors
Who cannot join
None listed.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Effects of Photobiomodulation With Low-Level Laser Therapy in Burning Mouth Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial
The main objective of this study is to assess the effects of Photobiomodulation with Low-level Laser Therapy to the pain management in Burning Mouth Syndrome patients, besides assessing their impact on the different aspects of their quality of life, using the necessary questionnaires to evaluate all the outcomes of chronic pain.
Read the detailed description
Study design A randomized, single blind, clinical trial was performed among patients with Burning Mouth Syndrome who attended the Oral Medicine Specialist Degree Program at the School of Dentistry at Complutense University in Madrid. This study was approved by the Hospital San Carlos Ethics Committee in Madrid (IEC no. 17/311-R_P) according with the principles of the Helsinki Declaration. This clinical study followed the guidelines established by the Consort Statement (http://www.consort-statement.org/).
Participants Adult patients older than 18 years of age who fulfilled the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-3) diagnostic criteria for BMS were consecutively included in this study. Patients not interested in participate in the study, unable to understand or answer the questionnaires and follow the appointments, patients suffering hiposialia or Sjögren's syndrome, patients who had received head and neck radiotherapy, pregnant women, patients with uncontrolled systemic diseases (diabetes, thyroid diseases, fibromyalgia or anemia) and patients suffering burning mouth symptoms secondary to local factors were excluded. Patients also had to read and sign and informed consent prior to inclusion in the study.
Before beginning the treatment, all patients provided a full medical history and a complete blood test including blood levels of iron, vitamin B12, folic acid, TSH and basal glucose levels. Patients who did not provide the blood tests, did not attend any of the appointments or follow-ups or did not fulfill correctly the questionnaires were removed from the study.
Interventions LLLT was applied in the study group with a Diode Laser Fox (A.R.C. Laser, Italy) using these parameters: a wavelength of 810 nm, a power of 0.6 W, a power density of 1.2 W/cm2, a beam area of 0.08 cm2 and an energy of 6 J with an application time per point of 10 seconds in 56 points (3 in the vestibular mucosa of the 4 quadrants, 6 in each of the two buccal mucosa, 6 in the hard palate, 4 in each lateral of the tongue, 6 in the dorse of the tongue and 4 sublingual points) with a distance between points of 2mm. It was applied, therefore, a dose of 12 J/cm2 in a continuous mode in a total of 10 sessions, 2 sessions per week for 5 weeks. The laser was applied perpendicularly in contact with the mucosa. All patients and the clinician wore the protective eyeglasses provided with the laser device.
For the placebo group the Low-Level Laser Therapy was applied in the same 56 points, 10 seconds per point and the same number of sessions but with the device turned off.
Outcomes Medical reports, medical questionnaires and blood tests (iron, vit B12, folic acid, TSH and basal glucose) were collected before starting the laser application. Pain was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (0-10 cm) by the patients before starting each session and at two follow-up sessions, 1 and 4 months after finishing the treatment.
Different questionnaires validated to Spanish were also fulfilled by patients. The questionnaires were the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) for the general health status, the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) for the oral patient's quality of life, the Epworth sleepiness scale, the psychometric test Symptom Check List 90 (SCL 90), the Beck's depression inventory and the McGill Pain Questionnaire. These questionnaires were fulfilled baseline and at the end of the 10 laser sessions and in the 1st and 4th-months follow-ups.
Sample size The sample size was calculated considering the previous study performed by Sikora et al, 2018 applying Low-Level Laser Therapy in similar parameters with a placebo group. We considered that the acceptable improvement in Laser group would be 4 points in VAS for pain. With a p = 0.05, a statistical power of 90% to detect this difference would require 10 subjects in each study group.
Randomization Burning Mouth Syndrome patients were randomly assigned to one of the treatments (Low-Level Laser Therapy or placebo) in a 1:1 ratio using a computer-generated algorithm stratified by using a block sized of 4. The patient's arrival number was his assigned number for the study following a correlative sequence. Group assignation for each number was kept in a sealed envelope that was no opened until the moment of treatment. An investigator not involved in the Low-Level Laser Therapy performed the randomization. The clinician who applied the Low-Level Laser Therapy was not involved in this process.
Blinding All patients were blinded during all the trial. They wore protective glasses and were also advised to close their eyes during treatment. In addition, the laser was programmed not to emit any type of sound alarm. One clinician collected the VAS and the questionnaires fulfilled by the patients and another clinician applied the laser treatment. All patients were warned of not speaking with the laser clinician. Blinding was revealed after all participants finished the trial, and all the data were analyzed
Statistical methods All the analysis was done using SPSS version 25.0 (SPSS Inc. New York, NY, USA). Statistical analysis included basic descriptive statistics. Comparison of categorical variables was done using chi-square or Fisher's exact test and comparison of continuous variables between test and placebo groups was done using Mann-Whitney U test. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to determine whether the intragroup decreases in the different questionnaires were statistically significant. Differences were considered significant if p was less than 0.05.
- Conditions
- Burning Mouth Syndrome
- Being tested
- Photobiomodulation, Placebo
- Keywords
- Low-level Laser Therapy, Burning Mouth Syndrome, Photobiomodulation, Visual Analogue Scale, Oral Health Impact Profile, Clinical Trial
- Medical subject headings
- Burning Mouth Syndrome
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
PhotobiomodulationRadiation
Photobiomodulation whit Low-Level Laser Therapy
PlaceboRadiation
Device turned off
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Test group | Experimental | Low-Level Laser Therapy was applied in the test group with a Diode Laser Fox (A.R.C. Laser, Italy) using these parameters: a wavelength of 810 nm, a power of 0.6 W, a power density of 1.2 W/cm2, a beam area of 0.08 cm2 and an energy of 6 J with an application time per point of 10 seconds in 56 points (3 in the vestibular mucosa of the 4 quadrants, 6 in each of the two buccal mucosa, 6 in the hard palate, 4 in each lateral of the tongue, 6 in the dorsum of the tongue and 4 sublingual points) with a distance between points of 2mm. It was applied, therefore, a dose of 12 J/cm2 in a continuous mode in a total of 10 sessions, 2 sessions per week for 5 weeks. Receives: Radiation: Photobiomodulation |
| Placebo group | Placebo comparator | Low-Level Laser Therapy was applied in the placebo group with a Diode Laser Fox (A.R.C. Laser, Italy) turned off with an application time per point of 10 seconds in 56 points (3 in the vestibular mucosa of the 4 quadrants, 6 in each of the two buccal mucosa, 6 in the hard palate, 4 in each lateral of the tongue, 6 in the dorsum of the tongue and 4 sublingual points) with a distance between points of 2mm. It was applied, therefore, a dose of 12 J/cm2 in a continuous mode in a total of 10 sessions, 2 sessions per week for 5 weeks. Receives: Radiation: Placebo |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Changes in Visual Analogue Scale for Pain
Pain was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (0-10 cm) by the patients before starting each session and at two follow-up sessions, 1 and 4 months after finishing the treatment.
Measured: Baseline (day 1), Session2 (day 4), Session 3 (day 8), Session 4 (day 11), Session 5 (day 15), Session 6 (day 18), Session 7 (day 22), Session 8 (day 25), Session 9 (day 29), Session 10 (day 32), 1st month follow-up (day 60), 4th month follow-up(day 150)
Secondary outcomes (5)
Description of Pain: Mc Gill Pain Questionnaire validated to Spanish
The patient is provided with a form comprising instructions and 20 word groups. The patient is instructed to read each word group and decide whether there is a work in the group which describes the pain he/she is experiencing there and then. The patient should circle one word in the group, which describes their pain. If there is no word in the group, which describes their pain, they are to move on to the next group until they have completed each of the 20 groups.
Groups 1 to 10 are words used to describe sensory experience, groups 11 to 15 are affective words, 16 is evaluative and 17 to 20 are miscellaneous groups.
Measured: Baseline (day 1), Session 10 (day 32), 1st month follow-up (day 60), 4th month follow-up (day 150)
General Health Short Form with the 36 Health Survery validated to Spanish
The SF-36 consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability. The eight sections are: vitality, physical functioning, bodily pain, general health perceptions, physical role functioning, emotional role functioning, social role functioning and mental health
Measured: Baseline (day 1), Session 10 (day 32), 1st month follow-up (day 60), 4th month follow-up (day 150)
Oral patient's quality of life with the Oral Health Impact Profile 14 validated to Spanish
This questionnaire includes 14 questions about oral pain, physical, psychological, and social limitations and disabilities whose score range from 0 to 4. The total score varies from 0 to 56. Poorer scores correspond to low quality of life.
Measured: Baseline (day 1), Session 10 (day 32), 1st month follow-up (day 60), 4th month follow-up (day 150)
Epworth sleepiness scale validated to Spanish
The questionnaire asks the subject to rate his or her probability of falling asleep on a scale of increasing probability from 0 to 3 for eight different situations that most people engage in during their daily lives, though not necessarily every day. The scores for the eight questions are added together to obtain a single number. A number in the 0-9 range is considered to be normal while a number in the 10-24 range indicates that expert medical advice should be sought. For instance, scores of 11-15 are shown to indicate the possibility of mild to moderate sleep apnea, where a score of 16 and above indicates the possibility of severe sleep apnea or narcolepsy.
Measured: Baseline (day 1), Session 10 (day 32), 1st month follow-up (day 60), 4th month follow-up (day 150)
Psychometris test Symptom Check List 90 validated to Spanish
According to the overview given by the publisher, the SCL-90-R is normed on individuals 13 years and older. It consists of 90 items with options from 0 to 4 and takes 12-15 minutes to administer, yielding nine scores along primary symptom dimensions and three scores among global distress indices. The primary symptom dimensions that are assessed are somatization, obsessive-compulsive, interpersonal sensitivity, depression, anxiety, hostility, phobic anxiety, paranoid ideation, psychoticism, and a category of "additional items" which helps clinicians assess other aspect of the clients symptoms (e.g. item 19, "poor appetite"). The three indices are global wellness index, hardiness, and symptom free. The higher scores, the poorer psychological status.
Measured: Baseline (day 1), Session 10 (day 32), 1st month follow-up (day 60), 4th month follow-up (day 150)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Jul 2019
- Study start1 Apr 2018
- Primary completion30 Jun 2019
- Study completion30 Jun 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Burning Mouth SyndromeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Randomized single blind placebo controlled study
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Rosa María López-Pintor Muñoz
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Rosa María López-Pintor Muñoz, Universidad Complutense de Madrid
- Investigators
- Rosa María López-Pintor, PhD, Study director, Universidad Complutense Madrid
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04034849
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 0003
- Status last verified
- Jul 2019
- First submitted
- 19 Jul 2019
- Last updated
- 26 Jul 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS) The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition. Cephalalgia. 2018 Jan;38(1):1-211. doi: 10.1177/0333102417738202. No abstract available.
PubMed 29368949Montero-Martin J, Bravo-Perez M, Albaladejo-Martinez A, Hernandez-Martin LA, Rosel-Gallardo EM. Validation the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14sp) for adults in Spain. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2009 Jan 1;14(1):E44-50.
PubMed 19114956
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Jul 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effects of Photobiomodulation With Low-Level Laser Therapy in Burning Mouth Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04034849
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 0003
- Conditions
- Burning Mouth Syndrome
- Keywords
- Low-level Laser Therapy, Burning Mouth Syndrome, Photobiomodulation, Visual Analogue Scale, Oral Health Impact Profile, Clinical Trial
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Rosa María López-Pintor MuñozUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Apr 2018 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Jun 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Jun 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 26 Jul 2019 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The main objective of this study is to assess the effects of Photobiomodulation with Low-level Laser Therapy to the pain management in Burning Mouth Syndrome patients, besides assessing their impact on the different aspects of their quality of life, using the necessary questionnaires to evaluate all the outcomes of chronic pain.
Detailed description
Study design A randomized, single blind, clinical trial was performed among patients with Burning Mouth Syndrome who attended the Oral Medicine Specialist Degree Program at the School of Dentistry at Complutense University in Madrid. This study was approved by the Hospital San Carlos Ethics Committee in Madrid (IEC no. 17/311-R_P) according with the principles of the Helsinki Declaration. This clinical study followed the guidelines established by the Consort Statement (http://www.consort-statement.org/).
Participants Adult patients older than 18 years of age who fulfilled the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-3) diagnostic criteria for BMS were consecutively included in this study. Patients not interested in participate in the study, unable to understand or answer the questionnaires and follow the appointments, patients suffering hiposialia or Sjögren's syndrome, patients who had received head and neck radiotherapy, pregnant women, patients with uncontrolled systemic diseases (diabetes, thyroid diseases, fibromyalgia or anemia) and patients suffering burning mouth symptoms secondary to local factors were excluded. Patients also had to read and sign and informed consent prior to inclusion in the study.
Before beginning the treatment, all patients provided a full medical history and a complete blood test including blood levels of iron, vitamin B12, folic acid, TSH and basal glucose levels. Patients who did not provide the blood tests, did not attend any of the appointments or follow-ups or did not fulfill correctly the questionnaires were removed from the study.
Interventions LLLT was applied in the study group with a Diode Laser Fox (A.R.C. Laser, Italy) using these parameters: a wavelength of 810 nm, a power of 0.6 W, a power density of 1.2 W/cm2, a beam area of 0.08 cm2 and an energy of 6 J with an application time per point of 10 seconds in 56 points (3 in the vestibular mucosa of the 4 quadrants, 6 in each of the two buccal mucosa, 6 in the hard palate, 4 in each lateral of the tongue, 6 in the dorse of the tongue and 4 sublingual points) with a distance between points of 2mm. It was applied, therefore, a dose of 12 J/cm2 in a continuous mode in a total of 10 sessions, 2 sessions per week for 5 weeks. The laser was applied perpendicularly in contact with the mucosa. All patients and the clinician wore the protective eyeglasses provided with the laser device.
For the placebo group the Low-Level Laser Therapy was applied in the same 56 points, 10 seconds per point and the same number of sessions but with the device turned off.
Outcomes Medical reports, medical questionnaires and blood tests (iron, vit B12, folic acid, TSH and basal glucose) were collected before starting the laser application. Pain was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (0-10 cm) by the patients before starting each session and at two follow-up sessions, 1 and 4 months after finishing the treatment.
Different questionnaires validated to Spanish were also fulfilled by patients. The questionnaires were the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) for the general health status, the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) for the oral patient's quality of life, the Epworth sleepiness scale, the psychometric test Symptom Check List 90 (SCL 90), the Beck's depression inventory and the McGill Pain Questionnaire. These questionnaires were fulfilled baseline and at the end of the 10 laser sessions and in the 1st and 4th-months follow-ups.
Sample size The sample size was calculated considering the previous study performed by Sikora et al, 2018 applying Low-Level Laser Therapy in similar parameters with a placebo group. We considered that the acceptable improvement in Laser group would be 4 points in VAS for pain. With a p = 0.05, a statistical power of 90% to detect this difference would require 10 subjects in each study group.
Randomization Burning Mouth Syndrome patients were randomly assigned to one of the treatments (Low-Level Laser Therapy or placebo) in a 1:1 ratio using a computer-generated algorithm stratified by using a block sized of 4. The patient's arrival number was his assigned number for the study following a correlative sequence. Group assignation for each number was kept in a sealed envelope that was no opened until the moment of treatment. An investigator not involved in the Low-Level Laser Therapy performed the randomization. The clinician who applied the Low-Level Laser Therapy was not involved in this process.
Blinding All patients were blinded during all the trial. They wore protective glasses and were also advised to close their eyes during treatment. In addition, the laser was programmed not to emit any type of sound alarm. One clinician collected the VAS and the questionnaires fulfilled by the patients and another clinician applied the laser treatment. All patients were warned of not speaking with the laser clinician. Blinding was revealed after all participants finished the trial, and all the data were analyzed
Statistical methods All the analysis was done using SPSS version 25.0 (SPSS Inc. New York, NY, USA). Statistical analysis included basic descriptive statistics. Comparison of categorical variables was done using chi-square or Fisher's exact test and comparison of continuous variables between test and placebo groups was done using Mann-Whitney U test. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to determine whether the intragroup decreases in the different questionnaires were statistically significant. Differences were considered significant if p was less than 0.05.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Randomized single blind placebo controlled study
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Test group | Experimental | Radiation: PhotobiomodulationLow-Level Laser Therapy was applied in the test group with a Diode Laser Fox (A.R.C. Laser, Italy) using these parameters: a wavelength of 810 nm, a power of 0.6 W, a power density of 1.2 W/cm2, a beam area of 0.08 cm2 and an energy of 6 J with an application time per point of 10 seconds in 56 points (3 in the vestibular mucosa of the 4 quadrants, 6 in each of the two buccal mucosa, 6 in the hard palate, 4 in each lateral of the tongue, 6 in the dorsum of the tongue and 4 sublingual points) with a distance between points of 2mm. It was applied, therefore, a dose of 12 J/cm2 in a continuous mode in a total of 10 sessions, 2 sessions per week for 5 weeks. |
| Placebo group | Placebo comparator | Radiation: PlaceboLow-Level Laser Therapy was applied in the placebo group with a Diode Laser Fox (A.R.C. Laser, Italy) turned off with an application time per point of 10 seconds in 56 points (3 in the vestibular mucosa of the 4 quadrants, 6 in each of the two buccal mucosa, 6 in the hard palate, 4 in each lateral of the tongue, 6 in the dorsum of the tongue and 4 sublingual points) with a distance between points of 2mm. It was applied, therefore, a dose of 12 J/cm2 in a continuous mode in a total of 10 sessions, 2 sessions per week for 5 weeks. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 31 to 85 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Adult patients older than 18 years of age who fulfilled the International Classification of Headache Disorders (ICHD-3) diagnostic criteria for Burning Mouth Syndrome Exclusion Criteria
- Patients not interested in participate in the study, unable to understand or answer the questionnaires and follow the appointments, patients suffering hiposialia or Sjögren's syndrome, patients who had received head and neck radiotherapy, pregnant women, patients with uncontrolled systemic diseases (diabetes, thyroid diseases, fibromyalgia or anemia) and patients suffering burning mouth symptoms secondary to local factors
Key exclusion criteria (0 listed)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| PhotobiomodulationPhotobiomodulation whit Low-Level Laser Therapy | Radiation | Test group |
| PlaceboDevice turned off | Radiation | Placebo group |
Primary outcome
Changes in Visual Analogue Scale for Pain
Time frame: Baseline (day 1), Session2 (day 4), Session 3 (day 8), Session 4 (day 11), Session 5 (day 15), Session 6 (day 18), Session 7 (day 22), Session 8 (day 25), Session 9 (day 29), Session 10 (day 32), 1st month follow-up (day 60), 4th month follow-up(day 150)
Pain was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (0-10 cm) by the patients before starting each session and at two follow-up sessions, 1 and 4 months after finishing the treatment.
5 secondary outcomes
Description of Pain: Mc Gill Pain Questionnaire validated to Spanish
Time frame: Baseline (day 1), Session 10 (day 32), 1st month follow-up (day 60), 4th month follow-up (day 150)
General Health Short Form with the 36 Health Survery validated to Spanish
Time frame: Baseline (day 1), Session 10 (day 32), 1st month follow-up (day 60), 4th month follow-up (day 150)
Oral patient's quality of life with the Oral Health Impact Profile 14 validated to Spanish
Time frame: Baseline (day 1), Session 10 (day 32), 1st month follow-up (day 60), 4th month follow-up (day 150)
Epworth sleepiness scale validated to Spanish
Time frame: Baseline (day 1), Session 10 (day 32), 1st month follow-up (day 60), 4th month follow-up (day 150)
Psychometris test Symptom Check List 90 validated to Spanish
Time frame: Baseline (day 1), Session 10 (day 32), 1st month follow-up (day 60), 4th month follow-up (day 150)
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 26 Jul 2019.
- Background: PubMed 29368949Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society (IHS) The International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition. Cephalalgia. 2018 Jan;38(1):1-211. doi: 10.1177/0333102417738202. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 19114956Montero-Martin J, Bravo-Perez M, Albaladejo-Martinez A, Hernandez-Martin LA, Rosel-Gallardo EM. Validation the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14sp) for adults in Spain. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2009 Jan 1;14(1):E44-50.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Burning Mouth Syndrome
Not yet recruiting
Improving Prescribing Quality for Oral Mucosal Disorders Using a Pharmacist-Led Model
Oral Lichen Planus, Recurrent Aphthous Stomatitis
Recruiting
MucoLock™ for Treatment of Stomatitis
Stomatitis, Pain
RecruitingObservational study
Reducing Patient Memory Recall in the Burning Mouth Patient Population
Burning Mouth Syndrome
Active, not recruiting
Photobiomodulation Therapy vs. Alpha-Lipoic Acid in Burning Mouth Syndrome Treatment
Burning Mouth Syndrome, Low Level Laser Therapy
Not yet recruiting
Burning Mouth Syndrome: Effects of Occlusal Splint Therapy
Burning Mouth Syndrome, Orofacial Pain
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Rosa María López-Pintor, PhD study director
Universidad Complutense Madrid
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Photobiomodulation in people with Burning Mouth Syndrome, run by Rosa María López-Pintor Muñoz at 1 site in Spain.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 0 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 26 Jul 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Spain. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Changes in Visual Analogue Scale for Pain (time frame: Baseline (day 1), Session2 (day 4), Session 3 (day 8), Session 4 (day 11), Session 5 (day 15), Session 6 (day 18), Session 7 (day 22), Session 8 (day 25), Session 9 (day 29), Session 10 (day 32), 1st month follow-up (day 60), 4th month follow-up(day 150)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04034849, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 26 Jul 2019.