Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32587752›Full record

ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2020

A randomised controlled pilot trial of two interventions to manage dry mouth in pre-operative elective surgical patients.

Leesa Morton, Amanda Tsan Yue Siu, Samuel Fowler, Chen Zhou, Christopher Nixon, Doug Campbell

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 45% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Leesa MortonDepartment of Anaesthesia, Canterbury District Health Board, 2 Riccarton Avenue, Christchurch Central, Christchurch, 8011 New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-2562-6400
Amanda Tsan Yue SiuDepartment of Anaesthesia, Counties Manukau District Health Board, 100 Hospital Road, Otahuhu, Auckland 2025 New Zealand.
Samuel FowlerDepartment of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Auckland District Health Board, Level 8, Support Building, Auckland City Hospital, Park Road, Grafton, Auckland 1023 New Zealand.
Chen ZhouDepartment of Anaesthesia, Counties Manukau District Health Board, 100 Hospital Road, Otahuhu, Auckland 2025 New Zealand.
Christopher NixonDepartment of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Auckland District Health Board, Level 8, Support Building, Auckland City Hospital, Park Road, Grafton, Auckland 1023 New Zealand.
Doug CampbellDepartment of Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, Auckland District Health Board, Level 8, Support Building, Auckland City Hospital, Park Road, Grafton, Auckland 1023 New Zealand.
Auckland City Hospital · NZCounties Manukau District Health Board · NZCanterbury District Health Board · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDry mouth is a common perioperative patient complaint. There are a number of treatments used for dry mouth in other settings which are effective. None have been tested previously in the perioperative setting. Interventions to Manage Dry mouth (IM DRY) compared the effect of water and a saliva substitute on mouth dryness. The primary objective was to demonstrate the feasibility of conducting a large randomised controlled trial and secondary scientific aims were to assess treatment potential efficacy.

methodsSingle blind, pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) of 101 pre-operative elective surgical patients who were randomised to water or saliva substitute (Biotene oral rinse, GlaxoSmithKline, Australia) at a tertiary, university hospital. Dry mouth was assessed by 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) and 5-point Likert score.

resultsOne hundred participants completed follow-up and comprised the analysis dataset. All feasibility outcomes were achieved (recruitment rate > 5 participants a week, >95% completeness of the dataset, study protocol acceptability to staff, acceptability to participants > 66% and adherence to time limits within the protocol). Mean recruitment rate was 6 participants per week. These data were 99% complete. There were no adverse side effects or complications noted. There were no concerns raised by staff regarding acceptability. Overall, there was a mean of 30 min (± SD 5 min) between delivery of the intervention and the assessment, 30 min being the target time. The difference in VAS post intervention was - 11.2 mm (95% CI - 17.3 to - 5.1 mm) for water and - 12.7 mm (95% CI - 18.7 to - 6.7 mm) for saliva substitute. The proportion of patients who had improved dry mouth increased from 52% for water to 62% for saliva substitute.

conclusionsIM DRY successfully achieved its primary feasibility aims: recruitment rate, completeness of these, acceptability and protocol adherence. Saliva substitutes, used in the perioperative management of dry mouth, may be a simple, inexpensive, and low risk solution to help alleviate this common complaint. A large randomised controlled trial is feasible and is currently recruiting (ANZCTR 12619000132145). ETHICS AND

trial registrationNorthern A New Zealand Health and Disability Ethics Committee (reference 17/NTA/152). Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (Number: 12618001270202). Registered retrospectively 18 October 2018.

Indexed as

AnaesthesiaArtificial salivaDry mouthElective surgeryFeasibilityPatient centred outcomePilotPre-operativeRandomisedTreatmentXerostomia

Identifiers

PMID32587752
PMCPMC7313130
OpenAlexW3037028587

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.