ABSTRACT
Five saliva stimulants (Salivin, V6, Mucidan, Ascoxal-T and Nicotinamide) and three saliva substitutes (Saliment, Salisynt and an ex témpore solution) were evaluated in 106 patients with a low salivay flow rate and a long history of dry mouth. The study was carried out as a multi-centre study in collaboration with ten different hospital dental clinics. The participants were interviewed about their complaints related to dry mouth. Each patient was then asked to use the eight saliva stimulants and substitutes for 14 days in a randomized order with one week intervals. After the 14-day-periods, the patients were interviewed about the effect of the various products by a dentist using a standardized questionnaire. Paraffin-stimulated whole saliva samples were collected after each test period. The most serious complaints among the patients were, besides dryness of the mouth, difficulty to talk and difficulty to swallow. The results showed that all eight tested saliva stimulants and substitutes relieved the symptoms of dry mouth to some extent. However, V6 chewing gum and Salivin lozenge were ranked as the two best products by the patients. No long-term effect was found with any of the eight products on the flow rate of paraffin-stimulated whole saliva.
Subject(s)
Saliva, Artificial/therapeutic use , Saliva/drug effects , Xerostomia/therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Ascorbic Acid/therapeutic use , Carboxymethylcellulose Sodium/therapeutic use , Drug Combinations , Female , Glycerol/therapeutic use , Humans , Lactates/therapeutic use , Lactic Acid , Middle Aged , Niacinamide/therapeutic use , Saliva/radiation effects , Secretory Rate/drug effects , Sorbitol/therapeutic use , Xerostomia/etiology , Xerostomia/physiopathologyABSTRACT
The analgesic effect and the occurrence of local reactions after repeated application of a lidocaine/prilocaine cream (EMLA 5%) were investigated in 31 haemodialysis patients. The cream was used for alleviation of cannulation pain prior to the haemodialysis (HD) for a period of 1-1.5 years. In each patient 300 to 312 applications of the cream were made during the period. Local skin reactions were recorded after the cream applications and the analgesic effect was evaluated with double-blind, crossover placebo controls at regular intervals. Seventeen patients completed the study. EMLA gave considerable pain relief and was significantly better than placebo at all effect evaluations but one. The frequency of local reactions was low and not correlated to the number of applications of EMLA. Two patients, however, interrupted their treatment due to local irritation.
