Volume 39, Issue 3 pp. 287-297
ARTICLE

Efficacy of saliva substitutes and stimulants in the treatment of dry mouth

Lydia See BDSc, MS

Lydia See BDSc, MS

Master Program in Geriatric Dentistry, Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry of USC, Los Angeles, California

Lydia See is currently a Senior Lecturer in Special Needs Dentistry, School of Dentistry and Health Sciences, Charles Sturt University.

Search for more papers by this author
Mehdi Mohammadi DDS, MPH, MS

Mehdi Mohammadi DDS, MPH, MS

Master Program in Geriatric Dentistry, Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry of USC, Los Angeles, California

Assistant Professor of Clinical Dentistry, Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry of USC, Los Angeles, California

Search for more papers by this author
Phuu P. Han DDS, PhD

Phuu P. Han DDS, PhD

Division of Dental Public Health and Pediatric Dentistry, Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry of USC, Los Angeles, California

Search for more papers by this author
Roseann Mulligan DDS, MS

Roseann Mulligan DDS, MS

Division of Dental Public Health and Pediatric Dentistry, Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry of USC, Los Angeles, California

Search for more papers by this author
Reyes Enciso PhD

Corresponding Author

Reyes Enciso PhD

Division of Dental Public Health and Pediatric Dentistry, Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry of USC, Los Angeles, California

Correspondence

Reyes Enciso, PhD, Associate Professor—Instructional, Division of Dental Public Health and Pediatric Dentistry, 925 West 34th St, room 4268, Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry of USC, Los Angeles, CA, 90089–0641 USA.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 27 February 2019
Citations: 16

Abstract

Aims

To evaluate the efficacy of saliva substitutes and stimulants compared to placebo in improving findings of dry mouth not caused by Sjӧgren's.

Methods and Results

Four databases were searched (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE) through March 2018. Only randomized controlled trials (RCT) using placebo interventions with dry mouth patients were included. Outcomes included salivary flow and self-reported patient improvement. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used. A total of 348 references were reviewed, resulting in 7 RCTs with 257 dry mouth patients with 5 studies at high risk of bias, 1 unclear and 1 low risk being included. Topical spray of 1% malic acid increased unstimulated (Difference in Means [DM] = 0.096, 95% CI = 0.092-0.100; P < 0.001) and stimulated (DM = 0.203, 95% CI = 0.106-0.300; P < 0.001) salivary flow in 2 studies. Patients using 1% malic acid topical spray were 5.4 times more likely to report improvement compared to placebo (95% CI = 2.634-11.091; P < 0.001) in 2 studies. No significant improvements were found with other products when compared to placebo.

Conclusion

Use of 1% malic acid topical spray seems to improve dry mouth compared to placebo. Quality of the evidence was low due to risk of bias and imprecision.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

The authors have no conflicts of interest.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.