Correlation Between Clinical Oral Dryness Score and Salivary Flow Rates in Active and Passive Smokers

Authors

  • Seeme Nigar
  • Sobia Hassan
  • Sidra Fahim
  • Ahmed Bin Khalid
  • Faisal Salim

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51985/JBUMDC2019116

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the mean clinical oral dryness score (CODs) and salivary flow rate (SFR) in subjects exposed to
active and passive smoking. The secondary aim was to determine the correlation between CODs and SFR and potential
factors associated with CODs and SFR in our subjects.
Study Design and Setting: The clinical observational study was conducted at the Outpatient department of oral diagnosis
at Altamash Institute of Dental Medicine, Karachi from Jan 2019-Jul 2019.
Methodology: A total of 217 participants of ages 15 – 80years coming for routine dental checkup of either gender were
included. A thorough oral examination was performed for all the subjects. A non-stimulated saliva sample was collected
from the oral cavity of subjects in a graduated container. The salivary flow rate was noted in ml/min for 5 minutes.
Assessment of oral dryness/hypo-salivation was examined through CODs (clinical oral dryness score).The data were
analyzed using SPSS software version 23.
Results: The mean COD score and SFR were calculated as 1 and 0.42 ml/5min respectively. The Pearson’s correlation
between COD score and SFR level was calculated as -0.281 (negative correlation) such as the SFR significantly decreased
when the COD score increased (p<0.05). The age, gender, smoking status, betel quid and areca nut consumption showed
statistically significant difference in mean COD score and SFR levels (p<0.05).
Conclusion: Salivary flow rate was significantly decreased with increase in COD score thus having an implication on oral
dryness feeling in these participants.

References

Dodds M, Roland S, Edgar M, Thornhill M. Saliva A review of its role in maintaining oral health and preventing dental disease. Bdj Team. 2015;2:15123.

Tiwari M. Science behind human saliva. J Nat Sci Biol Med. 2011;2(1):53-8.

Osailan SM, Pramanik R, Shirlaw P, Proctor GB, Challacombe SJ. Clinical assessment of oral dryness: development of a scoring system related to salivary flow and mucosal wetness. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012;114(5):597- 603.

Farsi NM. Signs of oral dryness in relation to salivary flow rate, pH, buffering capacity and dry mouth complaints. BMC Oral Health. 2007;7:15.

Löfgren CD, Wickström C, Sonesson M, Lagunas PT, Christersson C. A systematic review of methods to diagnose oral dryness and salivary gland function. BMC Oral Health. 2012;12(1):29.

Wolff MS, Kleinberg I. The effect of ammonium glycopyrrolate (Robinul)-induced xerostomia on oral mucosal wetness and flow of gingival crevicular fluid in humans. Arch Oral Biol. 1999;44(2):97-102.

Shimazaki Y, Fu B, Yonemoto K, Akifusa S, Shibata Y, Takeshita T, et al. Stimulated salivary flow rate and oral health status. J Oral Sci. 2017;59(1):55-62.

Rehan F, Khan BRS, Memon MS, Naqvi S, Khan R, Sultan

Z. Analysis of resting mouth salivary flow rate and salivary pH of tobacco chewers and smokers. J Pak Dent Assoc. 2016;4:159-63.

Challacombe SJ, Proctor GB. Clinical assessment. Bdj. 2014;217:486.

Hijjaw O, Alawneh M, Ojjoh K, Abuasbeh H, Alkilany A, Qasem N, et al. Correlation between Xerostomia index, Clinical Oral Dryness Scale, and ESSPRI with different hyposalivation tests. Open Access Rheumatol. 2019;11:11- 8.

Sreebny LM, Valdini A, Yu A. Xerostomia. Part II: Relationship to nonoral symptoms, drugs, and diseases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1989;68(4):419-27.

Ship JA, Fox PC, Baum BJ. How much saliva is enough? 'Normal' function defined. J Am Dent Assoc. 1991;122(3):63- 9.

Rad M, Kakoie S, Niliye Brojeni F, Pourdamghan N. Effect of Long-term Smoking on Whole-mouth Salivary Flow Rate and Oral Health. J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2010;4(4):110-4.

Jager DHJ, Bots CP, Forouzanfar T, Brand HS. Clinical oral dryness score: evaluation of a new screening method for oral dryness. Odontol. 2018;106(4):439-44.

Correia J, Martins A, Romao V, Pinto J, Gonçalves A, Simão R, et al. Association Of Clinical Oral Dryness Score With Unstimulated Salivary Flow Rate In Xerostomia Patients. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal2017.

Ship JA, Baum BJ. Is reduced salivary flow normal in old people? Lancet. 1990;336(8729):1507.

Osterberg T, Birkhed D, Johansson C, Svanborg A. Longitudinal study of stimulated whole saliva in an elderly population. Scand J Dent Res. 1992;100(6):340-5.

Nederfors T, Isaksson R, Mornstad H, Dahlof C. Prevalence of perceived symptoms of dry mouth in an adult Swedish population--relation to age, sex and pharmacotherapy. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1997;25(3):211-6.

Singh P. Collaborating centres: Rediscovering an extended arm of World Health Organization. J Indian Assoc Public Health Dent. 2015;13(1):11-3.

Alaee A,Azizi A, Valaei N, Moeini SH. The Correlation between Cigarette Smoking and Salivary Flow Rate J Res Dentomaxillofac Sci. 2017;2(3):5-9.

Khan GJ, Javed M, Ishaq M. Effect of smoking on salivary flow rate. Gomal Journal of Medical Sciences. 2010;8(2).

Patil PB, Bathi R, Chaudhari S. Prevalence of oral mucosal lesions in dental patients with tobacco smoking, chewing, and mixed habits: A cross-sectional study in South India. J Family Community Med. 2013;20(2):130-5.

Abdul Khader NF, Dyasanoor S. Assessment of Salivary Flow Rate and pH Among Areca Nut Chewers and Oral Submucous Fibrosis Subjects: A Comparative Study. J Cancer Prev. 2015;20(3):208-15.

Petrusic N, Posavac M, Sabol I, Mravak-Stipetic M. The Effect of Tobacco Smoking on Salivation. Acta Stomatol Croat. 2015;49(4):309-15.

Venkatesh D, Puranik RS, Vanaki SS, Puranik SR. Study of salivary arecoline in areca nut chewers. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. 2018;22(3):446.

Downloads

Published

2021-03-18

How to Cite

Nigar, S. ., Hassan, S. ., Fahim, S. ., Khalid, A. B. ., & Salim, F. . (2021). Correlation Between Clinical Oral Dryness Score and Salivary Flow Rates in Active and Passive Smokers. Journal of Bahria University Medical and Dental College, 10(2), 120–123. https://doi.org/10.51985/JBUMDC2019116

Issue

Section

Original Articles