Longman L P, McCracken C F, Higham S M, Field E A
Department of Clinical Dental Sciences, University of Liverpool School of Dentistry, Liverpool L69 3BX, UK.
Oral Dis. 2000 Nov;6(6):366-70. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-0825.2000.tb00128.x.
To compare subjective complaints of xerostomia and salivary gland dysfunction and a clinical assessment of oral dryness with an objective measurement of salivary gland dysfunction, in a group of UK patients attending a Dry Mouth Clinic. The aim of the study was to identify signs and symptoms that may be of predictive value for salivary gland hypofunction (SGH) in clinical practice.
This prospective study investigated 214 patients who attended a Dry Mouth Clinic, held at Liverpool University Dental Hospital. Patients gave a history of xerostomia for a minimum of 6 months and were asked standardised questions to subjectively assess oral dysfunction. The oral mucosa was then clinically assessed for dryness and sialometry was performed. Unstimulated whole saliva flow rates (UFR) of < 0.2 ml min-1 were considered to be indicative of SGH.
One or more symptoms of oral dysfunction were reported in 178 (83%) patients, in addition to xerostomia. The clinician diagnosed oral dryness in 105 patients. Objective evidence of SGH was found in 125 (58%) of patients. The clinicians' subjective assessment of oral dryness was indicative of a reduced UFR (P < 0.0001) and a significant predictor of an UFR < 0.2 ml min-1 using logistic regression analysis (odds ratio 9.6; 95% CI 4.8 and 19.3). The mean UFR of patients who reported symptoms of oral dysfunction was significantly lower than the mean UFR of patients who reported no oral dysfunction. Using logistic and multiple regression analyses, symptoms of oral dysfunction were not found to be significant predictors of either an UFR < 0.2 ml min-1 or a reduced UFR.
The clinical assessment of oral dryness was a significant predictor of SGH, in this selected group of patients. Patients who complain of xerostomia may have additional symptoms of oral dysfunction indicative of a reduced UFR.
在一组前往口干诊所就诊的英国患者中,比较口干和唾液腺功能障碍的主观主诉以及口腔干燥的临床评估与唾液腺功能障碍的客观测量结果。本研究的目的是确定在临床实践中可能对唾液腺功能减退(SGH)具有预测价值的体征和症状。
这项前瞻性研究调查了214名前往利物浦大学牙科医院开设的口干诊所就诊的患者。患者有至少6个月的口干病史,并被问及标准化问题以主观评估口腔功能障碍。然后对口腔黏膜进行干燥临床评估,并进行唾液流量测定。非刺激性全唾液流速(UFR)<0.2毫升/分钟被认为提示SGH。
除口干外,178名(83%)患者报告了一种或多种口腔功能障碍症状。临床医生诊断出105名患者存在口腔干燥。125名(58%)患者发现了SGH的客观证据。临床医生对口腔干燥的主观评估提示UFR降低(P<0.0001),并且使用逻辑回归分析是UFR<0.2毫升/分钟的显著预测因素(优势比9.6;95%可信区间4.8和19.3)。报告口腔功能障碍症状的患者的平均UFR显著低于未报告口腔功能障碍的患者的平均UFR。使用逻辑回归和多元回归分析,未发现口腔功能障碍症状是UFR<0.2毫升/分钟或UFR降低的显著预测因素。
在这组特定患者中,口腔干燥的临床评估是SGH的显著预测因素。主诉口干的患者可能有其他提示UFR降低的口腔功能障碍症状。