IADR Abstract Archives
Development of a Score to Classify Severity of Dry Mouth
Objectives: Almost 500 trials on xerostomia/dry mouth/hyposalivation are registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. Still, there are no uniform requirements for patient inclusion into studies. Even though a wide range of instruments are available to separately grade the severity of xerostomia (subjective feeling of dry mouth) or hyposalivation (objectively reduced salivary secretion), no tool combines xerostomia and hyposalivation. The aim of the present work was to develop a dry mouth severity score (DMSS) based on published questionnaires and measures, introducing cut-off values and a grading system based on patient data from the Dry Mouth Clinic, University of Oslo, Norway.
Methods: We have used multiple instruments to describe dry mouth patients: questionnaires on oral health-related quality of life and xerostomia, tests of salivary secretion and candida growth, evaluation of oral dryness, pathology of mucosa and teeth, and tests of taste- and smell function. Among these instruments, we propose a DMSS based on the General Xerostomia Question (GXQ), Shortened Xerostomia Inventory (SXI), Clinical Oral Dryness Score (CODS), and secretion of unstimulated and chewing-stimulated whole saliva (UWS and SWS). Data from patients with primary Sjögren’s Syndrome (n=55), non-Sjögren’s Sicca (n=24), head and neck cancer (n=29), psychiatric disorders (n=23), and controls (n=64) were used to calculate the DMSS.
Results: Cut-off values were set at GXQ ≥2, SXI ≥11, CODS ≥6, UWS ≤0.1mL/min, and SWS ≤0.7mL/min (one point (p) each, range 0-5p). For DMSS, a grading from 0-3 is proposed; 0 (0p), 1 (1-2p), 2 (3p), and 3 (4-5p).
DMSS differentiated well between patients and controls as 65% of patients scored 2 or 3 and 77% of controls scored 0. DMSS correlated positively with oral health-related quality of life.
Conclusions: DMSS provides a means to classify dry mouth patients according to severity for standardized inclusion into clinical trials, securing patient uniformity and relevant comparisons between studies.
Methods: We have used multiple instruments to describe dry mouth patients: questionnaires on oral health-related quality of life and xerostomia, tests of salivary secretion and candida growth, evaluation of oral dryness, pathology of mucosa and teeth, and tests of taste- and smell function. Among these instruments, we propose a DMSS based on the General Xerostomia Question (GXQ), Shortened Xerostomia Inventory (SXI), Clinical Oral Dryness Score (CODS), and secretion of unstimulated and chewing-stimulated whole saliva (UWS and SWS). Data from patients with primary Sjögren’s Syndrome (n=55), non-Sjögren’s Sicca (n=24), head and neck cancer (n=29), psychiatric disorders (n=23), and controls (n=64) were used to calculate the DMSS.
Results: Cut-off values were set at GXQ ≥2, SXI ≥11, CODS ≥6, UWS ≤0.1mL/min, and SWS ≤0.7mL/min (one point (p) each, range 0-5p). For DMSS, a grading from 0-3 is proposed; 0 (0p), 1 (1-2p), 2 (3p), and 3 (4-5p).
DMSS differentiated well between patients and controls as 65% of patients scored 2 or 3 and 77% of controls scored 0. DMSS correlated positively with oral health-related quality of life.
Conclusions: DMSS provides a means to classify dry mouth patients according to severity for standardized inclusion into clinical trials, securing patient uniformity and relevant comparisons between studies.