How Common is Dry Mouth? Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis of Prevalence Estimates

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Agostini,Bernardo Antonio
Data de Publicação: 2018
Outros Autores: Cericato,Graziela Oro, Silveira,Ethieli Rodrigues da, Nascimento,Gustavo Giacomelli, Costa,Francine dos Santos, Thomson,Willian Murray, Demarco,Flavio Fernando
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Brazilian Dental Journal
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402018000600606
Resumo: Abstract The aim of this paper is to systematically review the literature to estimate the overall prevalence of xerostomia/hyposalivation in epidemiological studies. An electronic search was carried out up to February 2018 with no language restrictions. A total of 5760 titles were screened and just twenty-nine papers were included in review and the meta-analysis after a two independently reviewers applied the selection criteria. Data were extracted from PubMed and Web of Science databases. Eligibility criteria included original investigations from observational population-based studies that reported the prevalence of xerostomia or data that allowed the calculation of prevalence of xerostomia and/or hyposalivation. Studies conducted in samples with specific health conditions, literature reviews, case reports and anthropological studies, as conferences or comments were excluded. Sample size, geographic location of the study, study design, age of the studied population, diagnosis methods, and evaluation criteria used to determine xerostomia e/or hyposalivation were extracted for meta-analysis and meta-regression. Multivariate meta-regression analysis was performed to explore heterogeneity among studies. The overall estimated prevalence of dry mouth was 22.0% (95%CI 17.0-26.0%). Higher prevalence of xerostomia was observed in studies conducted only with elderly people. Despite diverse approaches to the condition’s measurement, just over one in four people suffer from xerostomia, with higher rates observed among older people. Moreover, the measurement methods used currently may over- or underestimate xerostomia. These findings highlight the need for further work on existing and new clinical measure and will be useful to determine which one is more reliable in clinical and epidemiological perspectives.
id FUNORP-1_08ff732877416fa8663b38aa577883f1
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0103-64402018000600606
network_acronym_str FUNORP-1
network_name_str Brazilian Dental Journal
repository_id_str
spelling How Common is Dry Mouth? Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis of Prevalence Estimatesxerostomiadry mouthhyposalivationglobal prevalencesalivary functionAbstract The aim of this paper is to systematically review the literature to estimate the overall prevalence of xerostomia/hyposalivation in epidemiological studies. An electronic search was carried out up to February 2018 with no language restrictions. A total of 5760 titles were screened and just twenty-nine papers were included in review and the meta-analysis after a two independently reviewers applied the selection criteria. Data were extracted from PubMed and Web of Science databases. Eligibility criteria included original investigations from observational population-based studies that reported the prevalence of xerostomia or data that allowed the calculation of prevalence of xerostomia and/or hyposalivation. Studies conducted in samples with specific health conditions, literature reviews, case reports and anthropological studies, as conferences or comments were excluded. Sample size, geographic location of the study, study design, age of the studied population, diagnosis methods, and evaluation criteria used to determine xerostomia e/or hyposalivation were extracted for meta-analysis and meta-regression. Multivariate meta-regression analysis was performed to explore heterogeneity among studies. The overall estimated prevalence of dry mouth was 22.0% (95%CI 17.0-26.0%). Higher prevalence of xerostomia was observed in studies conducted only with elderly people. Despite diverse approaches to the condition’s measurement, just over one in four people suffer from xerostomia, with higher rates observed among older people. Moreover, the measurement methods used currently may over- or underestimate xerostomia. These findings highlight the need for further work on existing and new clinical measure and will be useful to determine which one is more reliable in clinical and epidemiological perspectives.Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto2018-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402018000600606Brazilian Dental Journal v.29 n.6 2018reponame:Brazilian Dental Journalinstname:Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)instacron:FUNORP10.1590/0103-6440201802302info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAgostini,Bernardo AntonioCericato,Graziela OroSilveira,Ethieli Rodrigues daNascimento,Gustavo GiacomelliCosta,Francine dos SantosThomson,Willian MurrayDemarco,Flavio Fernandoeng2018-11-27T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0103-64402018000600606Revistahttps://www.scielo.br/j/bdj/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpbdj@forp.usp.br||sergio@fosjc.unesp.br1806-47600103-6440opendoar:2018-11-27T00:00Brazilian Dental Journal - Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv How Common is Dry Mouth? Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis of Prevalence Estimates
title How Common is Dry Mouth? Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis of Prevalence Estimates
spellingShingle How Common is Dry Mouth? Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis of Prevalence Estimates
Agostini,Bernardo Antonio
xerostomia
dry mouth
hyposalivation
global prevalence
salivary function
title_short How Common is Dry Mouth? Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis of Prevalence Estimates
title_full How Common is Dry Mouth? Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis of Prevalence Estimates
title_fullStr How Common is Dry Mouth? Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis of Prevalence Estimates
title_full_unstemmed How Common is Dry Mouth? Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis of Prevalence Estimates
title_sort How Common is Dry Mouth? Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis of Prevalence Estimates
author Agostini,Bernardo Antonio
author_facet Agostini,Bernardo Antonio
Cericato,Graziela Oro
Silveira,Ethieli Rodrigues da
Nascimento,Gustavo Giacomelli
Costa,Francine dos Santos
Thomson,Willian Murray
Demarco,Flavio Fernando
author_role author
author2 Cericato,Graziela Oro
Silveira,Ethieli Rodrigues da
Nascimento,Gustavo Giacomelli
Costa,Francine dos Santos
Thomson,Willian Murray
Demarco,Flavio Fernando
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Agostini,Bernardo Antonio
Cericato,Graziela Oro
Silveira,Ethieli Rodrigues da
Nascimento,Gustavo Giacomelli
Costa,Francine dos Santos
Thomson,Willian Murray
Demarco,Flavio Fernando
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv xerostomia
dry mouth
hyposalivation
global prevalence
salivary function
topic xerostomia
dry mouth
hyposalivation
global prevalence
salivary function
description Abstract The aim of this paper is to systematically review the literature to estimate the overall prevalence of xerostomia/hyposalivation in epidemiological studies. An electronic search was carried out up to February 2018 with no language restrictions. A total of 5760 titles were screened and just twenty-nine papers were included in review and the meta-analysis after a two independently reviewers applied the selection criteria. Data were extracted from PubMed and Web of Science databases. Eligibility criteria included original investigations from observational population-based studies that reported the prevalence of xerostomia or data that allowed the calculation of prevalence of xerostomia and/or hyposalivation. Studies conducted in samples with specific health conditions, literature reviews, case reports and anthropological studies, as conferences or comments were excluded. Sample size, geographic location of the study, study design, age of the studied population, diagnosis methods, and evaluation criteria used to determine xerostomia e/or hyposalivation were extracted for meta-analysis and meta-regression. Multivariate meta-regression analysis was performed to explore heterogeneity among studies. The overall estimated prevalence of dry mouth was 22.0% (95%CI 17.0-26.0%). Higher prevalence of xerostomia was observed in studies conducted only with elderly people. Despite diverse approaches to the condition’s measurement, just over one in four people suffer from xerostomia, with higher rates observed among older people. Moreover, the measurement methods used currently may over- or underestimate xerostomia. These findings highlight the need for further work on existing and new clinical measure and will be useful to determine which one is more reliable in clinical and epidemiological perspectives.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-12-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402018000600606
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-64402018000600606
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/0103-6440201802302
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Dental Journal v.29 n.6 2018
reponame:Brazilian Dental Journal
instname:Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)
instacron:FUNORP
instname_str Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)
instacron_str FUNORP
institution FUNORP
reponame_str Brazilian Dental Journal
collection Brazilian Dental Journal
repository.name.fl_str_mv Brazilian Dental Journal - Fundação Odontológica de Ribeirão Preto (FUNORP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv bdj@forp.usp.br||sergio@fosjc.unesp.br
_version_ 1754204095325929472