The purpose of this study was to assess patient preference and product efficacy of three non-prescription products for the symptomatic relief of xerostomia. The study group consisted of 80 individuals with a complaint of chronic (> six months) xerostomia and an unstimulated salivary flow rate of < 0.1 mL/min. The three products--a sorbitol/xylitol-sweetened chewing gum, a sorbitol-sweetened sour lemon lozenge, and a sorbitol/xylitol-sweetened artificial saliva substitute spray--were assigned in a permuted block randomization scheme. Each product was used for two weeks with an interval of one week between trials. The study did not identify any product to be statistically significant in terms of patient preference. Kruskal-Wallis testing revealed no statistical significance (P > 0.589) among the products. No product demonstrated marked efficacy in stimulating salivary output. ANOVA analysis followed by Tukey HSD testing revealed no significant difference between the baseline paraffin-stimulated mean flow rate and the gum- and lozenge-stimulated flow rates.

Eighty‐two periodontally involved patients were treated in a split mouth design such that one quadrant received coronal scaling (CS), root planing (RP), modified Widman surgery (MW), and flap with osseous resection surgery (FO). The therapy was performed in three phases: Phase I: the teeth previously designated to receive RP, MW, and FO were thoroughly root planed and the teeth designated to receive CS were scaled with no subgingival instrumentation, plaque control was initiated and reinforced for the entire mouth; Phase II: the designated teeth received MW or FO surgery; and Phase III: maintenance therapy every three months. The CS teeth received coronal scaling and polishing during maintenance appointments, while RP, MW, and FO teeth received supragingival instrumentation, subgingival instrumentation and polishing. Clinical measurements were taken initially, four weeks post‐Phase I, 10 weeks post‐Phase II, and after each of two years of maintenance care. All therapy modalities resulted in a decrease of mean probing depth with the FO producing the greatest decrease followed by MW, RP, and CS. The deeper the initial probing depth, the greater was the mean reduction of probing depth. FO created a loss of mean probing attachment in the 1 to 4 mm category. RP and MW produced the greatest gain of mean probing attachment in the 5 to 6 mm category. RP, MW, and FO produced similar gains in the ≥7 mm category. FO created the most gingival recession followed by MW, RP, and CS.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract