Palliative Medicine

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for free access to the SAGE eReference platform!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Davies, A. N
Right arrow Articles by Sharma, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Davies, A. N
Right arrow Articles by Sharma, K.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Palliative Medicine, Vol. 12, No. 2, 105-111 (1998)
DOI: 10.1191/026921698670435903

A comparison of artificial saliva and pilocarpine in the management of xerostomia in patients with advanced cancer

Andrew N Davies

Palliative Medicine, St Christopher's Hospice, London

Charles Daniels

Rosamund Pugh

Palliative Medicine, Forest Holme, Poole

Kiran Sharma

Palliative Medicine, St Catherine's Hospice, Crawley

This was a crossover study comparing a mucin-based artificial saliva (Saliva OrthanaTM) and pilocarpine hydrochloride (SalagenTM) in the management of xerostomia in patients with advanced cancer. The pilocarpine was found to be more effective than the artificial saliva in terms of mean change in visual analogue scale scores for xerostomia (P = 0.003). Furthermore, more patients reported that it had helped their xerostomia, and more patients wanted to continue with it after the study. However, the pilocarpine was found to be associated with more side-effects than the artificial saliva (P < 0.001). These side-effects were usually reported as being mild. Of the patients who used both treatments, 50% preferred the artificial saliva, and 50% preferred the pilocarpine. The commonest reason for preferring the artificial saliva was the fact that it was a spray, rather than a tablet.

Key Words: saliva, artificial • pilocarpine • xerostomia • neoplasms • palliative care


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Palliat MedHome page
S Mercadante, L Calderone, P Villari, R Serretta, M Sapio, A Casuccio, and F Fulfaro
The use of pilocarpine in opioid-induced xerostomia
Palliative Medicine, September 1, 2000; 14(6): 529 - 531.
[PDF]

Home page
 Palliat MedHome page
A. N Davies
A comparison of artificial saliva and chewing gum in the management of xerostomia in patients with advanced cancer
Palliative Medicine, April 1, 2000; 14(3): 197 - 203.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Palliat MedHome page
P. Stone and R. A'Hern
Artificial saliva versus pilocarpine for xerostomia
Palliative Medicine, January 1, 1999; 13(1): 81 - 82.
[PDF]

Home page
 Palliat MedHome page
A. Davies and P. Williams
Authors' reply and correction
Palliative Medicine, January 1, 1999; 13(1): 82 - 83.
[PDF]

Home page
 BMJHome page
C. Regnard, S. Allport, and L. Stephenson
Mouth care and skin care in palliative medicine
BMJ, October 10, 1998; 317(7164): 1013 - 1013.
[Full Text]