ss logo
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Case Report
Editorial
Original Research Article
Review Article
Technical Note
ss logo
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Case Report
Editorial
Original Research Article
Review Article
Technical Note
ss logo
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Case Report
Editorial
Original Research Article
Review Article
Technical Note
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Original Research Article
4 (
2
); 55-60
doi:
10.25259/JADPR_48_2025

Assessment of xerostomia in general population: A questionnaire study as a screening tool for hyposalivation

Department of Prosthodontics, Ranjeet Deshmukh Dental College and Research Centre, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India.

*Corresponding author: Shreyas Sanjay Ingle, Department of Prosthodontics, Ranjeet Deshmukh Dental College and Research Centre, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India. shreyasingle64@gmail.com

Licence
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, transform, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

How to cite this article: Ingle SS, Pande N, Deshpande S, Bhoyar D, Kukreja S. Assessment of xerostomia in general population: A questionnaire study as a screening tool for hyposalivation. J Adv Dental Pract Res. 2025;4:55-60. doi: 10.25259/JADPR_48_2025

Abstract

Objectives:

The objective of the study was to assess xerostomia in the general population using a questionnaire and to evaluate its accuracy as a screening tool for detecting hyposalivation.

Material and Methods:

A diagnostic study involving 173 participants aged 36 years and above was conducted using a validated xerostomia questionnaire. Salivary flow was measured by sialometry after stimulating saliva with paraffin. A flow rate of < 0.7 mL/min indicated hyposalivation. The questionnaire’s reliability was tested using the Kappa statistic and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, while accuracy was evaluated using Spearman’s correlation and the Mann–Whitney test.

Results:

Out of 200 individuals approached, 173 participants were included (mean age: 56.32 years; 43.9% female and 56.1% male). Significant associations were found between questionnaire responses and clinically confirmed hyposalivation (P < 0.05). Key symptoms such as dry mouth during meals, difficulty swallowing, and dry mouth at night were strongly linked to reduced salivary flow. Conditions such as diabetes and hypertension also showed significant correlations.

Conclusion:

The xerostomia questionnaire proved to be a reliable and effective tool for screening hyposalivation in the general population. It can be integrated into routine healthcare practice to detect at-risk individuals, especially those with systemic conditions

Keywords

Diabetes mellitus
Hyposalivation
Salivary flow
Screening questionnaire
Xerostomia

INTRODUCTION

Hyposalivation is a reduced salivary flow that may result from a variety of extrinsic stimuli as well as natural changes.[1] Those who are affected by this condition may or may not experience the “dry mouth” (xerostomia) sensation. Both xerostomia and hyposalivation can arise independently, although xerostomia is typically a sign of hyposalivation because it is caused by a decrease in salivary secretion.[2]

Hyposalivation and xerostomia can be caused by a variety of disorders, from transient variables like stress and anxiety to autoimmune diseases and long-term ailments including rheumatoid arthritis, Parkinson’s disease, Sjogren’s syndrome, and diabetes mellitus.[3] The two conditions may also be found in patients requiring treatment for head-and-neck cancer and those with diseases specific to the salivary glands.[4] Hyposalivation is diagnosed through sialometry, a procedure that involves collecting saliva to determine the rate of salivary secretion per minute.[5]

Hyposalivation must be diagnosed since it can have a detrimental effect on everyday activities and quality of life.[6] An increased incidence of oral infectious diseases and disorders, such as caries and candidiasis, is another effect of hyposalivation.[7]

Hyposalivation combined with a weakened immune system promotes oral infections including dental caries because of plaque accumulation and saliva’s insufficient ability to act as a buffer.[8] Disruptions in the balance of the oral microbiota can contribute to the development of fungal infections, with candidiasis being the most common manifestation.[7]

Aim

Evaluation of Xerostomia in the General Population: A Questionnaire-Based Approach for Screening Hyposalivation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Study design

A diagnostic study was conducted to analyze the accuracy of a questionnaire on xerostomia as a screening tool for hyposalivation cases.

The study was designed and reported in accordance with the Standards for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy guidelines.

Inclusion criteria

Participants were recruited using a convenience sampling method. Individuals who provided informed consent after receiving detailed explanations about the study’s objectives and procedures were included, provided they met the following eligibility criteria:-

  1. Age 36 years or older

  2. No food consumption within the previous 2 h

  3. No dental treatment on the day of saliva collection, and

  4. No oral hygiene procedure was performed within an hour before saliva collection.

Exclusion criteria

  1. Age below 35 years

  2. Those were consumed food within the previous 2 h

  3. Those were having received dental treatment on the same day as the collection of saliva

  4. Individuals who had performed oral hygiene within 1 h before saliva collection were excluded.

Data collection

Initially, approval was obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee. Instructions related to the study procedure and counseling of all the participants, regarding stimulation of salivary flow were given. Participants also underwent a medical examination to identify any underlying systemic conditions potentially linked to hyposalivation.

Data were recorded based on the age and gender of the participants. Out of 200, a total of 173 participants reported for testing. They were provided with the modified xerostomia questionnaire proposed by Nunes et al.,[9] based on Torres et al.’s work [Supplementary Material].[10]

Supplementary Material

Stimulated salivary flow was collected between 8:30 and 10:30 am in a quiet room. Participants were asked to chew a parafilm tablet (1.5 cm × 1.5 cm) to stimulate saliva production. After swallowing the initial saliva, participants were instructed to continuously expectorate into a beaker over a period of 5 min. The collected saliva was assessed for salivary flow using a glass test tube, with a flow rate of <0.7 mL/min considered indicative of hyposalivation.[11]

The following are the photographs showing:

  1. Patient was filling questionnaire form before and after the saliva collection [Figure 1a]

  2. Saliva was collected in a beaker for 5 min [Figure 1b]

  3. Collected saliva was measured in a test tube [Figure 1c].

(a) Participant completing xerostomia questionnaire, (b) Collection of stimulated saliva over 5 minutes, (c) Measurement of saliva using graduated test tube.
Figure 1:
(a) Participant completing xerostomia questionnaire, (b) Collection of stimulated saliva over 5 minutes, (c) Measurement of saliva using graduated test tube.

Data analysis

It involved two key stages

Checking reliability

A questionnaire was given to 173 people twice, once before collecting the salivary flow and again after collecting the saliva, to determine whether their answers matched or not. For data verification, two methods were used: the Kappa statistic and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) to assess the consistency of the answers. The ICC results were categorized from not very good to nearly perfect.

Testing accuracy

The questionnaire responses were compared with the results of a test called sialometry, which measured saliva flow.

For data verification, statistical tests such as Spearman’s correlation and the Mann-Whitney test were used to evaluate how well the questionnaire matched the saliva test results in people diagnosed with or without hyposalivation.[12]

RESULTS

The number of responses of all the participants is mentioned in [Tables 1 and 2]. The descriptive statistics show that the sample has 173 individuals aged between 36 and 80, with an average age of 56.32 years. The gender distribution indicates that 43.9% (n = 76) of the participants were female and 56.1% (n = 97) were male (Software Used: IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences Statistics 20). Table 3 presents the association between the clinical diagnosis of hyposalivation and various questionnaire items. Significant associations (P < 0.05) were observed for all items, indicating a strong relationship between hyposalivation and the symptoms reported in the questionnaire. For example, feeling dry mouth during meals, having difficulty swallowing, and feeling dry mouth at night or upon waking were significantly associated with hyposalivation. Similarly, the perception of low saliva levels, the need to chew gum or mints, and frequent thirst at night also showed significant associations with hyposalivation. In addition, conditions such as diabetes mellitus and hypertension were significantly related to hyposalivation, highlighting the interconnectedness of these health issues.

Table 1: Distribution of xerostomia-related questionnaire responses (n=173).
Questions Number of responses and their (%)
Always Never Sometimes Very often Total
1. Feel dry mouth during meals? 12 (6.9) 70 (40.5) 77 (44.5) 14 (8.1) 173 (100)
2. Have difficulty swallowing food? 7 (4) 87 (50.3) 70 (40.5) 9 (5.2) 173 (100)
3. Perceive small amounts of saliva in your mouth most of the time? 17 (9.8) 62 (35.8) 68 (39.3) 26 (15) 173 (100)
4. Feel dry mouth at night or upon waking? 29 (16.8) 63 (36.4) 40 (23.1) 41 (23.7) 173 (100)
5. Feel dry mouth during the day? 19 (11) 72 (41.6) 59 (34.1) 23 (13.3) 173 (100)
6. Chew gum or mints to relieve the sensation of dry mouth? 4 (2.3) 137 (79.2) 23 (13.3) 9 (5.2) 173 (100)
7. Frequently wake up thirsty at night? 24 (13.9) 72 (41.6) 48 (27.7) 29 (16.8) 173 (100)
8. Have a burning sensation on your tongue? 0 (0) 142 (82.1) 22 (12.7) 9 (5.2) 173 (100)
Table 2: Distribution of systemic conditions and medication status (n=173).
Questions Number of responses and their (%)
No Yes Total
1. Are you having diabetes mellitus? 117 (67.6) 56 (32.4) 173 (100)
2. If yes, are you taking any medications for diabetes mellitus? 126 (72.8) 47 (27.2) 173 (100)
3. Are you having hypertension/blood pressure problems? 121 (69.9) 52 (30.1) 173 (100)
4. If yes, are you taking any medications for hypertension? 129 (74.6) 44 (25.4) 173 (100)
Table 3: Association between clinical diagnosis of hyposalivation and each item of the questionnaire.
Variables Hyposalivation Total Value df P-value
Yes No
1. Feel dry mouth during meals?
  Always 12 (6.94) 0 (0) 12 (6.94) 71.498 3 < 0.001**
  Never 5 (2.89) 65 (37.57) 70 (40.46)
  Sometimes 42 (24.28) 35 (20.23) 77 (44.51)
  Very often 13 (7.51) 1 (0.58) 14 (8.09)
  Total 72 (41.62) 101 (58.38) 173 (100)
2. Have difficulty swallowing food?
  Always 7 (4.05) 0 (0) 7 (4.05) 48.706 3 < 0.001**
  Never 16 (9.25) 71 (41.04) 87 (50.29)
  Sometimes 40 (23.12) 30 (17.34) 70 (40.46)
  Very often 9 (5.2) 0 (0) 9 (5.2)
  Total 72 (41.62) 101 (58.38) 173 (100)
3. Perceive small amount of saliva in your mouth most of the time?
  Always 15 (8.67) 2 (1.16) 17 (9.83) 61.436 3 < 0.001**
  Never 4 (2.31) 58 (33.53) 62 (35.84)
  Sometimes 33 (19.08) 35 (20.23) 68 (39.31)
  Very often 20 (11.56) 6 (3.47) 26 (15.03)
  Total 72 (41.62) 101 (58.38) 173 (100)
4. Feel dry mouth at night or upon waking?
  Always 28 (16.18) 1 (0.58) 29 (16.76) 90.009 3 < 0.001**
  Never 2 (1.16) 61 (35.26) 63 (36.42)
  Sometimes 13 (7.51) 27 (15.61) 40 (23.12)
  Very often 29 (16.76) 12 (6.94) 41 (23.7)
  Total 72 (41.62) 101 (58.38) 173 (100)
5. Feel dry mouth during the day?
  Always 18 (10.4) 1 (0.58) 19 (10.98) 89.065 3 < 0.001**
  Never 3 (1.73) 69 (39.88) 72 (41.62)
  Sometimes 30 (17.34) 29 (16.76) 59 (34.1)
  Very often 21 (12.14) 2 (1.16) 23 (13.29)
  Total 72 (41.62) 101 (58.38) 173 (100)
6. Chew gum or mints to relieve the sensation of dry mouth?
  Always 4 (2.31) 0 (0) 4 (2.31) 42.840 3 < 0.001**
  Never 40 (23.12) 97 (56.07) 137 (79.19)
  Sometimes 19 (10.98) 4 (2.31) 23 (13.29)
  Very often 9 (5.2) 0 (0) 9 (5.2)
  Total 72 (41.62) 101 (58.38) 173 (100)
7. Frequently wake up thirsty at night?
  Always 20 (11.56) 5 (2.89) 25 (14.45) 60.082 4 < 0.001**
  Never 7 (4.05) 64 (36.99) 71 (41.04)
  Sometimes 24 (13.87) 24 (13.87) 48 (27.75)
  Very often 21 (12.14) 8 (4.62) 29 (16.76)
  Total 72 (41.62) 101 (58.38) 173 (100)
8. Have a burning sensation on your tongue?
  Never 47 (27.17) 95 (54.91) 142 (82.08) 24.029 2 < 0.001**
  Sometimes 17 (9.83) 5 (2.89) 22 (12.72)
  Very often 8 (4.62) 1 (0.58) 9 (5.2)
  Total 72 (41.62) 101 (58.38) 173 (100)
9. Are you having diabetes mellitus?
  No 37 (21.39) 80 (46.24) 117 (67.63) 14.860 1 < 0.001**
  Yes 35 (20.23) 21 (12.14) 56 (32.37)
  Total 72 (41.62) 101 (58.38) 173 (100)
10. If yes, are you taking any medications for diabetes mellitus?
  No 40 (23.12) 86 (49.71) 126 (72.83) 18.604 1 < 0.001**
  Yes 32 (18.5) 15 (8.67) 47 (27.17)
  Total 72 (41.62) 101 (58.38) 173 (100)
11. Are you having hypertension/blood pressure problem?
  No 42 (24.28) 79 (45.66) 121 (69.94) 7.906 1 0.005*
  Yes 30 (17.34) 22 (12.72) 52 (30.06)
  Total 72 (41.62) 101 (58.38) 173 (100)
12. If yes, are you taking any medications for hypertension?
  No 46 (26.59) 83 (47.98) 129 (74.57) 7.414 1 0.006*
  Yes 26 (15.03) 18 (10.4) 44 (25.43)
  Total 72 (41.62) 101 (58.38) 173 (100)

P < 0.05: * Significant, ** Highly significant, df: Degrees of freedom.

DISCUSSION

This study assessed the accuracy of a xerostomia questionnaire as a screening tool for detecting hyposalivation in the general population and explored its association with systemic conditions such as diabetes mellitus and hypertension.[11] Among 200 individuals approached, 173 participants aged between 36 and 80 years (mean age: 56.32 years) met the inclusion criteria and were evaluated. Among the participants, 43.9% (n = 76) were females, while 56.1% (n = 97) were males.

The frequency of various xerostomia-related symptoms reported by participants underlines the clinical relevance of dry mouth as a prevalent concern.[12] For instance, 6.9% of individuals reported always experiencing a dry mouth during meals, while 44.5% reported sometimes experiencing it, and 8.1% very often. Difficulty swallowing food was never experienced by 50.3%, but 4% always reported this difficulty. Approximately 9.8% of participants frequently perceived having a reduced amount of saliva, while 16.8% consistently reported experiencing dry mouth during the night or upon waking.

Despite 79.2% of participants never using chewing gum or mints to relieve dry mouth, and 82.1% not experiencing burning sensations on the tongue, a considerable proportion reported symptoms that align closely with hyposalivation.[12] The statistical analysis revealed significant associations (P < 0.05) between hyposalivation confirmed by sialometry and multiple questionnaire items, including:

  • Dry mouth during meals

  • Difficulty in swallowing food

  • Dry mouth at night or upon waking

  • Perceived low saliva volume

  • Frequent thirst at night.

These results confirm the effectiveness of the xerostomia questionnaire in identifying individuals with reduced salivary flow.

In addition, this study emphasized the relationship between hyposalivation and systemic conditions, with 32.4% of participants diagnosed with diabetes mellitus (27.2% on medication), and 30.1% affected by hypertension (25.4% on medication). These associations align with the established understanding that systemic diseases and long-term medication use can contribute to salivary gland hypofunction.[6] Diuretics, antihypertensives, and hypoglycemics often have xerogenic side effects that compromise salivary secretion.[13]

The statistical reliability of the questionnaire was supported by test-retest reliability measures using the Kappa statistic and the ICC, indicating good consistency in responses.[10] Accuracy was further validated by comparing questionnaire results with sialometric findings through Spearman’s correlation and the Mann–Whitney test. These results reinforce the questionnaire’s utility as a non- invasive, cost-effective, and efficient screening tool for hyposalivation, especially valuable in primary healthcare and epidemiological settings where sialometry may not be feasible.[12]

Moreover, nocturnal symptoms – particularly dry mouth upon waking – demonstrated strong associations with hyposalivation, suggesting that specific time-of-day questions could enhance the sensitivity of xerostomia screening. Although the study did not directly assess quality of life, the presence of symptoms such as difficulty in swallowing and frequent dryness can be expected to interfere with fundamental oral functions such as eating, speaking, and sleeping, thereby impacting overall well-being.[14]

Despite the promising results, the study’s limitations include the use of convenience sampling, which may reduce generalizability, and the cross-sectional design, which does not allow for causal inferences or longitudinal tracking. Future research incorporating larger, more diverse samples and longitudinal follow-up will be essential to validate these findings and understand the long-term impact of hyposalivation.[15]

In summary, the xerostomia questionnaire showed strong diagnostic potential as a screening instrument for hyposalivation. Its significant correlation with both clinical salivary flow measurements and underlying systemic conditions underscores the importance of integrating such tools into routine medical and dental assessments, particularly for patients with chronic illnesses.[16] Early identification and appropriate intervention can prevent complications such as dental caries, oral infections, and poor oral hygiene, ultimately improving the patient’s quality of life.[17]

CONCLUSION

The results indicate that the xerostomia questionnaire demonstrated greater accuracy as a screening tool for detecting hyposalivation. The significant associations between questionnaire responses and clinical indicators validate its potential as a valuable epidemiological tool for identifying suspected cases within populations. Given the strong relationship between hyposalivation and conditions such as diabetes mellitus and hypertension, integrating this screening tool into routine healthcare assessments could facilitate early detection and timely intervention. Individuals who yield positive results on the questionnaire should undergo additional diagnostic tests to confirm hyposalivation and receive appropriate clinical management. Further studies incorporating objective salivary flow measurements and longitudinal follow-ups are recommended to enhance diagnostic accuracy and assess long-term implications.

Ethical approval:

The research/study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Ranjeet Deshmukh Ental College and Research Centre, Nagpur, number RDDC&RC/IEC/P.G/ JUNE/2024/61, dated 24th June 2024.

Declaration of patient consent:

The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent forms. In the form, the patient has given consent for their images and other clinical information to be reported in the journal. The patient understands that the patient’s names and initials will not be published and due efforts will be made to conceal their identity, but anonymity cannot be guaranteed.

Conflicts of interest:

Dr. Neelam Pande and Dr. Saee Deshpande are on the Editorial Board of the Journal.

Use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for manuscript preparation:

The authors confirm that they have used ChatGPT (OpenAI) solely for language editing and grammatical refinement. No AI tool was used for data analysis or scientific content generation.

Financial support and sponsorship: Nil.

References

  1. , , , . Salivary hypofunction: An update on aetiology, diagnosis and therapeutics. Arch Oral Biol. 2015;60:242-55.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. , . Etiopathogenesis and diagnosis of dry mouth. Av Odontoestomatol. 2014;30:121-8.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. , . Epidemiology of Sjogren's syndrome-from an oral perspective. Curr Oral Health Rep. 2016;3:328-36.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. , , , . Assessment of xerostomia and its impact on quality of life in head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy, and validation of the Taiwanese version of the xerostomia questionnaire. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2008;36:141-8.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. , , , , , . The effect of clinical setting on the unstimulated salivary flow rate. Arch Oral Biol. 2016;69:7-12.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. , , , , , . Risk factors, hyposalivation and impact of xerostomia on oral health-related quality of life. Braz Oral Res. 2017;31:e14.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. , , , , , , et al. Elimination of oral candidiasis may increase stimulated whole salivary flow rate. Arch Oral Biol. 2016;71:129-33.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. , , , , , . Hyposalivation: etiology, diagnosis and treatment. Rev Bahiana Odonto. 2016;7:140-6.
    [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  9. , , . Factorial validation of a questionnaire for the detection of hyposalivation in in stitutionalized older adults. Rev Cien Plural. 2015;1:67.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. , , , , , , et al. Determination of the efficacy of a questionnaire for the detection of hyposalivation. Rev Assoc Paul Cir Dent. 2002;56:227-31.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. , , , , , . Accuracy of a questionnaire on xerostomia as a screening tool for hyposalivation. Int Dent J. 2020;70:427-34.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. , , , , , , et al. Relationship of hyposalivation and xerostomia in Mexican elderly with socioeconomic, sociodemographic and dental factors. Sci Rep. 2017;7:40686.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. , , , , . Efficacy of GUM® hydral versus biotene® oralbalance mouthwashes plus gels on symptoms of medication-induced xerostomia: A randomized, double-blind, crossover study. Clin Oral Invest. 2018;28:169-80.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. , , , . Quantifying radioxerostomia: salivary flow rate, examiner's score, and quality of life questionnaire. Strahlenther Onkol. 2006;182:336-41.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. , , , , , , et al. The effectiveness of thyme honey for the management of treatment-induced xerostomia in head and neck cancer patients: A feasibility randomized control trial. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2017;27:1-8.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. , , , , , , et al. Complete denture biofilm after brushing with specific denture paste, neutral soap and artificial saliva. Braz Dent J. 2013;24:47-52.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. , , . Knowledge, attitude and practice on hyposalivation in complete denture patients among dental interns in Chennai, India. J Pharm Sci Res. 2017;9:225-9.
    [Google Scholar]
Show Sections