Cargando…

A systematic review of methods to diagnose oral dryness and salivary gland function

BACKGROUND: The most advocated clinical method for diagnosing salivary dysfunction is to quantitate unstimulated and stimulated whole saliva (sialometry). Since there is an expected and wide variation in salivary flow rates among individuals, the assessment of dysfunction can be difficult. The aim o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Löfgren, Christina Diogo, Wickström, Claes, Sonesson, Mikael, Lagunas, Pablo Tapia, Christersson, Cecilia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3573918/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22870895
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6831-12-29
_version_ 1782259524998004736
author Löfgren, Christina Diogo
Wickström, Claes
Sonesson, Mikael
Lagunas, Pablo Tapia
Christersson, Cecilia
author_facet Löfgren, Christina Diogo
Wickström, Claes
Sonesson, Mikael
Lagunas, Pablo Tapia
Christersson, Cecilia
author_sort Löfgren, Christina Diogo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The most advocated clinical method for diagnosing salivary dysfunction is to quantitate unstimulated and stimulated whole saliva (sialometry). Since there is an expected and wide variation in salivary flow rates among individuals, the assessment of dysfunction can be difficult. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the quality of the evidence for the efficacy of diagnostic methods used to identify oral dryness. METHODS: A literature search, with specific indexing terms and a hand search, was conducted for publications that described a method to diagnose oral dryness. The electronic databases of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were used as data sources. Four reviewers selected publications on the basis of predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted from the selected publications using a protocol. Original studies were interpreted with the aid of Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) tool. RESULTS: The database searches resulted in 224 titles and abstracts. Of these abstracts, 80 publications were judged to meet the inclusion criteria and read in full. A total of 18 original studies were judged relevant and interpreted for this review. In all studies, the results of the test method were compared to those of a reference method. Based on the interpretation (with the aid of the QUADAS tool) it can be reported that the patient selection criteria were not clearly described and the test or reference methods were not described in sufficient detail for it to be reproduced. None of the included studies reported information on uninterpretable/intermediate results nor data on observer or instrument variation. Seven of the studies presented their results as a percentage of correct diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for the efficacy of clinical methods to assess oral dryness is sparse and it can be stated that improved standards for the reporting of diagnostic accuracy are needed in order to assure the methodological quality of studies. There is need for effective diagnostic criteria and functional tests in order to detect those individuals with oral dryness who may require oral treatment, such as alleviation of discomfort and/or prevention of diseases.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3573918
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35739182013-02-16 A systematic review of methods to diagnose oral dryness and salivary gland function Löfgren, Christina Diogo Wickström, Claes Sonesson, Mikael Lagunas, Pablo Tapia Christersson, Cecilia BMC Oral Health Research Article BACKGROUND: The most advocated clinical method for diagnosing salivary dysfunction is to quantitate unstimulated and stimulated whole saliva (sialometry). Since there is an expected and wide variation in salivary flow rates among individuals, the assessment of dysfunction can be difficult. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the quality of the evidence for the efficacy of diagnostic methods used to identify oral dryness. METHODS: A literature search, with specific indexing terms and a hand search, was conducted for publications that described a method to diagnose oral dryness. The electronic databases of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were used as data sources. Four reviewers selected publications on the basis of predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted from the selected publications using a protocol. Original studies were interpreted with the aid of Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) tool. RESULTS: The database searches resulted in 224 titles and abstracts. Of these abstracts, 80 publications were judged to meet the inclusion criteria and read in full. A total of 18 original studies were judged relevant and interpreted for this review. In all studies, the results of the test method were compared to those of a reference method. Based on the interpretation (with the aid of the QUADAS tool) it can be reported that the patient selection criteria were not clearly described and the test or reference methods were not described in sufficient detail for it to be reproduced. None of the included studies reported information on uninterpretable/intermediate results nor data on observer or instrument variation. Seven of the studies presented their results as a percentage of correct diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence for the efficacy of clinical methods to assess oral dryness is sparse and it can be stated that improved standards for the reporting of diagnostic accuracy are needed in order to assure the methodological quality of studies. There is need for effective diagnostic criteria and functional tests in order to detect those individuals with oral dryness who may require oral treatment, such as alleviation of discomfort and/or prevention of diseases. BioMed Central 2012-08-08 /pmc/articles/PMC3573918/ /pubmed/22870895 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6831-12-29 Text en Copyright ©2012 Löfgren et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Löfgren, Christina Diogo
Wickström, Claes
Sonesson, Mikael
Lagunas, Pablo Tapia
Christersson, Cecilia
A systematic review of methods to diagnose oral dryness and salivary gland function
title A systematic review of methods to diagnose oral dryness and salivary gland function
title_full A systematic review of methods to diagnose oral dryness and salivary gland function
title_fullStr A systematic review of methods to diagnose oral dryness and salivary gland function
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review of methods to diagnose oral dryness and salivary gland function
title_short A systematic review of methods to diagnose oral dryness and salivary gland function
title_sort systematic review of methods to diagnose oral dryness and salivary gland function
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3573918/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22870895
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6831-12-29
work_keys_str_mv AT lofgrenchristinadiogo asystematicreviewofmethodstodiagnoseoraldrynessandsalivaryglandfunction
AT wickstromclaes asystematicreviewofmethodstodiagnoseoraldrynessandsalivaryglandfunction
AT sonessonmikael asystematicreviewofmethodstodiagnoseoraldrynessandsalivaryglandfunction
AT lagunaspablotapia asystematicreviewofmethodstodiagnoseoraldrynessandsalivaryglandfunction
AT christerssoncecilia asystematicreviewofmethodstodiagnoseoraldrynessandsalivaryglandfunction
AT lofgrenchristinadiogo systematicreviewofmethodstodiagnoseoraldrynessandsalivaryglandfunction
AT wickstromclaes systematicreviewofmethodstodiagnoseoraldrynessandsalivaryglandfunction
AT sonessonmikael systematicreviewofmethodstodiagnoseoraldrynessandsalivaryglandfunction
AT lagunaspablotapia systematicreviewofmethodstodiagnoseoraldrynessandsalivaryglandfunction
AT christerssoncecilia systematicreviewofmethodstodiagnoseoraldrynessandsalivaryglandfunction