Question · asked by 1 review
Gum chewing (sugar-free) vs Within-subject before/after comparison of soft gum vs hard gum (no no-gum control): Oral mucosal moisture
- Population
- Elderly (>60 years) and medically compromised adults with xerostomia / dry mouth
- Intervention
- Gum chewing (sugar-free)
- Comparison
- Within-subject before/after comparison of soft gum vs hard gum (no no-gum control)
- Outcome
- Oral mucosal moisture
One small study found that chewing hard (but not soft) gum increased oral mucosal moisture.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Gum chewing (sugar-free) vs Within-subject before/after comparison of soft gum vs hard gum (no no-gum control) Oral mucosal moisture · Elderly (>60 years) and medically compromised adults with xerostomia / dry mouth · 2-week chewing period (soft then hard gum, with 2-week wash-out), Haemodialysis units, elderly / geriatric care, cancer and palliative care, and xerostomia / hyposalivation clinics (studies from multiple countries) One small study found that chewing hard (but not soft) gum increased oral mucosal moisture. The effect of gum chewing on xerostomia and salivary flow rate in elderly and medically compromised… (2023) All outcomes | Single study [22] (Nakagawa 2017): chewing hard gum significantly increased oral mucosal moisture whereas chewing soft gum did not. | 1 study · 12 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| The effect of gum chewing on xerostomia and salivary flow rate in elderly and medically compromised subjects: a systematic review and… 2023 All outcomes | 31 March 2023 | 26 | Low / Low |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.