Influence of two paraffin wax chewing gums with different con-sistencies on the stimulated salivary flow rate

Authors

  • Florence Blattner Center for Salivary Diagnostics, Hyposalivation and Halitosis, University Center for Dental Medicine Basel UZB, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
  • Fabio Saccardin Center for Salivary Diagnostics, Hyposalivation and Halitosis, University Center for Dental Medicine Basel UZB, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
  • Virginia Ortiz Center for Salivary Diagnostics, Hyposalivation and Halitosis, University Center for Dental Medicine Basel UZB, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
  • Andreas Filippi Center for Salivary Diagnostics, Hyposalivation and Halitosis, University Center for Dental Medicine Basel UZB, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61872/sdj-2024-03-09

PMID:

38864504

Keywords:

dry mouth, xerostomia, oligosialia, hyposalivation, sialometry, stimulated salivary flow rate, paraffin wax chewing gum

Abstract

This study investigated and compared the consistency and compressive strength of two commercially available paraffin wax chewing gums (Aurosan (AU) and GC Europe (GC)), as well as their impact on stimulated salivary flow rate. Instrumental texture analysis was utilized to assess the consistency and compressive strength of AU and GC during a 7-min chewing period. Subsequently, stimulated salivary flow rate (sSFR) was evaluated in healthy subjects using AU and GC over a 7-minute period. The compressive strengths from the preliminary test were compared over time with the sialometry data. Eighty-one test subjects, comprising 33 men and 48 women, participated. Over the 7-min measurement period, differences were observed in the total amount of saliva accumulated per minute. Direct comparison of AU and GC revealed that regardless of age and gender, the amount of saliva formed after 1 min was 0.63 times less with AU than with GC (95% CI: 0.56 - 0.70; P < 0.001). The accumulated saliva volume with AU was also significantly lower than that with GC in the first 4 min (P = 0.016). However, from minute 5 onwards, the two products no longer showed statistical differences in the total amount of saliva. Comparison of the compressive strength of AU and GC showed that the values after 1 and 2 min were significantly higher for AU than for GC (P < 0.05); for all other time points, the compressive strength was higher for GC. In the mixed-effects model after log-transformation of compressive strength and saliva volume, GC exhibited decreasing saliva volumes with increasing compressive strength (P <0.001). Conversely, the opposite was observed for AU (P = 0.019). The study suggests that the consistency or compressive strength of paraffin wax chewing gums from different manufacturers could impact sSFR.

References

Sreebny LM, Vissink A: Dry mouth – The malevolent symptom: a clinical guide. Arnes: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010, pp 13-44.

Nederfors T, Isaksson R, Mörnstad H, Dahlöf C. Prevalence of perceived symptoms of dry mouth in an adult Swedish population--relation to age, sex and pharmacotherapy. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1997;25:211-216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0528.1997.tb00928.x

Astor FC, Hanft KL, Ciocon JO. Xerostomia: a prevalent condition in the elderly. Ear Nose Throat J. 1999;78:476-479. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/014556139907800707

Saleh J, Figueiredo MA, Cherubini K, Salum FG. Salivary hypofunction: an update on aetiology, diagnosis and therapeutics. Arch Oral Biol. 2015;60:242-255. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2014.10.004

Davies AN. The management of xerostomia: a review. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 1997;6:209-214. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2354.1997.00036.x

Roulet JF, Zimmer S. Prophylaxe und Präventiv-zahnmedizin. Farbatlanten der Zahnmedizin Bd. 16, Thie-me Stuttgart, 2002.

Thomson WM, Chalmers JM, Spencer AJ, Ketabi M. The occurrence of xerostomia and salivary gland hypofunction in a population-based sample of older South Australians. Spec Care Dentist. 1999;19:20-23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-4505.1999.tb01363.x

Guggenheimer J, Moore PA. Xerostomia: etiology, recognition and treatment. J Am Dent Assoc. 2003;134:61-69; quiz 118-119. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2003.0018

Wiener RC, Wu B, Crout R, Wiener M, Plassman B, Kao E, McNeil D. Hyposalivation and xerostomia in den-tate older adults. J Am Dent Assoc. 2010;141:279-284. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2010.0161

Dawes C. Physiological factors affecting salivary flow rate, oral sugar clearance, and the sensation of dry mouth in man. J Dent Res. 1987;66:648-653. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345870660S207

Ericsson Y, Hardwick L. Individual diagnosis, prognosis and counselling for caries prevention. Caries Res. 1978;12:94-102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000260369

Becks H, Wainwright WW: Humans saliva XIII. Rate of flow of resting saliva in healthy individuals. J Dent Res 1943;22: 391-396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345430220050601

Shannon IL, Frome WJ. Enhancement of salivary flow rate and buffering capacity. J Can Dent Assoc (Tor). 1973;39:177-181.

Parvinen T, Larmas M. Age dependency of stimulated salivary flow rate, pH, and lactobacillus and yeast concentrations. J Dent Res. 1982;61:1052-1055. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345820610090501

Heintze U, Birkhed D, Björn H. Secretion rate and buffer effect of resting and stimulated whole saliva as a function of age and sex. Swed Dent J. 1983;7:227-238.

Banderas-tarabay JA, González-begné M, Sánchez-garduño M, Millán-cortéz E, López-rodríguez A, Vilchis-velázquez A: Flujo y concentración de proteínas en saliva total humana [The flow and concentration of pro-teins in human whole saliva]. Salud Publica Mex 1997;39: 433-441. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0036-36341997000500006

Bergdahl M. Salivary flow and oral complaints in adult dental patients. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2000;28:59-66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0528.2000.280108.x

Engelen L, de Wijk RA, Prinz JF, van der Bilt A, Bosman F. The relation between saliva flow after different stimulations and the perception of flavor and texture attributes in custard desserts. Physiol Behav. 2003;78:165-169. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0031-9384(02)00957-5

Dawes C, Macpherson LM. Effects of nine different chewing-gums and lozenges on salivary flow rate and pH. Caries Res. 1992;26:176-182. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000261439

Guobis Ž, Kareivienė V, Basevičienė N et al. Microflora of the oral cavity in patients with xerostomia. Me-dicina (Kaunas). 2011;47:646-651. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina47120094

Yeh CK, Johnson DA, Dodds MW, Sakai S, Rugh JD, Hatch JP. Association of salivary flow rates with maximal bite force. J Dent Res. 2000;79:1560-1565. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345000790080601

R core Team R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Compu-ting, Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org 2022.

Navazesh M, Christensen C, Brightman V. Clinical criteria for the diagnosis of salivary gland hypofunction. J Dent Res. 1992;71:1363-1369. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345920710070301

Närhi TO, Ainamo A, Meurman JH. Salivary yeasts, saliva, and oral mucosa in the elderly. J Dent Res. 1993;72:1009-1014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345930720060301

Ship JA, Fox PC, Baum BJ. How much saliva is enough? 'Normal' function defined. J Am Dent Assoc. 1991;122:63-69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1991.0098

Dawes C. Circadian rhythms in the flow rate and composition of unstimulated and stimulated human sub-mandibular saliva. J Physiol. 1975;244:535-548. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.1975.sp010811

Bots CP, Brand HS, Veerman EC, van Amerongen BM, Nieuw Amerongen AV. Preferences and saliva stim-ulation of eight different chewing gums. Int Dent J. 2004;54:143-148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1875-595X.2004.tb00270.x

Karami Nogourani M, Janghorbani M, Kowsari Isfahan R, Hosseini Beheshti M. Effects of Chewing Different Flavored Gums on Salivary Flow Rate and pH. Int J Dent. 2012;2012:569327. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/569327

Dawes C, Kubieniec K. The effects of prolonged gum chewing on salivary flow rate and composition. Arch Oral Biol. 2004;49:665-669. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archoralbio.2004.02.007

Jensen JL, Karatsaidis A, Brodin P. Salivary secretion: stimulatory effects of chewing-gum versus paraffin tablets. Eur J Oral Sci. 1998;106:892-896. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0909-8836..t01-7-.x

Downloads

Published

2024-06-12

How to Cite

Blattner, F., Saccardin, F., Ortiz, V., & Filippi, A. (2024). Influence of two paraffin wax chewing gums with different con-sistencies on the stimulated salivary flow rate. SWISS DENTAL JOURNAL SSO – Science and Clinical Topics, 134(3), 18–34. https://doi.org/10.61872/sdj-2024-03-09