Assessment of correlation between the Modified Schirmer Test and unstimulated salivary flow testing.

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE American journal of dentistry Pub Date : 2024-12-01
Jingwei Cai, Ire Ju, Samuel Madden, Rylan Jones, Franklin Garcia-Godoy, Udochukwu Oyoyo, So Ran Kwon
{"title":"Assessment of correlation between the Modified Schirmer Test and unstimulated salivary flow testing.","authors":"Jingwei Cai, Ire Ju, Samuel Madden, Rylan Jones, Franklin Garcia-Godoy, Udochukwu Oyoyo, So Ran Kwon","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the efficacy and subjects' perception of the Modified Schirmer Test (MST) to the traditional Unstimulated Salivary Flow Test (USFT) when measuring salivary flow rate for screening and monitoring patients' dry mouth.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 100 subjects were enrolled including subjects with and without dry mouth. All subjects answered a brief self-reported survey about dry mouth before and after the two types of saliva tests and their preference for the type of test administered. The order of performing MST and USFT were randomized. MST was conducted by the clinician holding a Schirmer strip paper at the bottom of the subject's mouth for 1 minute. USFT was measured by having the subject spit any accumulating saliva into a medicine cup for 5 minutes. Correlation analyses were conducted to test the relationship between MST and USFT using the Pearson correlation coefficient. All analyses were performed at a P< 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A significant positive correlation existed between the two salivary flow tests (r= 0.556, P< 0.001). Most of the subjects (79%) preferred the MST while 6% preferred USFT; 15% reported no preference. A negative association between MST and USFT with age indicated that as age increased, subjects' salivary flow rate results for both types of tests decreased (r= - 0.287, P= 0.004).</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>MST provides dental care providers with an effective, economical, easy-to-perform, and patient-preferred method to screen and monitor salivary flow rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":7538,"journal":{"name":"American journal of dentistry","volume":"37 6","pages":"313-316"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and subjects' perception of the Modified Schirmer Test (MST) to the traditional Unstimulated Salivary Flow Test (USFT) when measuring salivary flow rate for screening and monitoring patients' dry mouth.

Methods: A total of 100 subjects were enrolled including subjects with and without dry mouth. All subjects answered a brief self-reported survey about dry mouth before and after the two types of saliva tests and their preference for the type of test administered. The order of performing MST and USFT were randomized. MST was conducted by the clinician holding a Schirmer strip paper at the bottom of the subject's mouth for 1 minute. USFT was measured by having the subject spit any accumulating saliva into a medicine cup for 5 minutes. Correlation analyses were conducted to test the relationship between MST and USFT using the Pearson correlation coefficient. All analyses were performed at a P< 0.05.

Results: A significant positive correlation existed between the two salivary flow tests (r= 0.556, P< 0.001). Most of the subjects (79%) preferred the MST while 6% preferred USFT; 15% reported no preference. A negative association between MST and USFT with age indicated that as age increased, subjects' salivary flow rate results for both types of tests decreased (r= - 0.287, P= 0.004).

Clinical significance: MST provides dental care providers with an effective, economical, easy-to-perform, and patient-preferred method to screen and monitor salivary flow rate.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
改良Schirmer试验与非刺激唾液流量试验的相关性评估。
目的:评价改良Schirmer试验(MST)对传统无刺激唾液流量试验(USFT)在检测唾液流量筛查和监测患者口干时的效果和被试的感知。方法:共纳入100名受试者,包括有无口干的受试者。所有受试者在两种类型的唾液测试之前和之后都回答了一份关于口干的简短自我报告调查,以及他们对测试类型的偏好。MST和USFT的执行顺序随机化。MST由临床医生手持席尔默试纸在受试者的口腔底部进行1分钟。USFT是通过让受试者将任何积累的唾液吐到药杯中5分钟来测量的。利用Pearson相关系数进行相关分析,检验MST与USFT之间的关系。所有分析均以P< 0.05进行。结果:两项唾液流量指标之间存在显著正相关(r= 0.556, P< 0.001)。大多数受试者(79%)喜欢MST, 6%喜欢USFT;15%的人表示没有偏好。MST和USFT与年龄呈负相关,表明随着年龄的增加,受试者的两种测试的唾液流量结果均下降(r= - 0.287, P= 0.004)。临床意义:MST为牙科保健提供者提供了一种有效、经济、易于操作和患者首选的筛查和监测唾液流量的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
American journal of dentistry
American journal of dentistry 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
57
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Dentistry, published by Mosher & Linder, Inc., provides peer-reviewed scientific articles with clinical significance for the general dental practitioner.
期刊最新文献
Two-year clinical performance of an alkasite direct restorative material in Class I and II cavities without using an adhesive resin: A prospective single-arm clinical trial. Assessment of correlation between the Modified Schirmer Test and unstimulated salivary flow testing. Biofilm attachment and mineralizing potential of contemporary restorative materials. Color match and stability of single-shade resin-based composites before and after artificial aging. Denture biofilm increases respiratory diseases in the elderly. A mini-review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1