4.1 Article

Anticholinergic burden and dry mouth among Finnish, community-dwelling older adults

Journal

GERODONTOLOGY
Volume 35, Issue 1, Pages 3-10

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ger.12304

Keywords

aged; anticholinergic burden; anticholinergic drug scale; anticholinergic drugs; dry mouth; hyposalivation; xerostomia

Funding

  1. Social Insurance Institute
  2. City of Kuopio
  3. Finnish Dental Society Apollonia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ObjectiveThe aim was to study whether the anticholinergic burden of drugs is related to xerostomia and salivary secretion among community-dwelling elderly people. BackgroundAnticholinergic drugs have been shown to be a risk factor for dry mouth, but little is known about the effects of cumulative exposure to anticholinergic drugs measured by anticholinergic burden on salivary secretion or xerostomia. MethodsThe study population consisted of 152 community-dwelling, dentate, non-smoking, older people from the Oral Health GeMS study. The data were collected by interviews and clinical examinations. Anticholinergic burden was determined using the Anticholinergic Drug Scale (ADS). A Poisson regression model with robust error variance was used to estimate relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI 95%). ResultsParticipants with a high-anticholinergic burden (ADS3) were more likely to have xerostomia (RR: 3.17; CI: 1.44-6.96), low-unstimulated salivary flow (<0.1mL/min; RR: 2.31, CI: 1.22-4.43) and low-stimulated salivary flow (<1.0mL/min; RR: 1.50, CI: 0.80-2.81) compared to reference group (ADS 0). In participants with a moderate anticholinergic burden (ADS 1-2), all the risk estimates for xerostomia, unstimulated and stimulated salivary secretion varied between 0.55 and 3.13. Additional adjustment for the total number of drugs, antihypertensives and sedative load caused only slight attenuation of the risk estimates. ConclusionA high-anticholinergic burden was associated with low-unstimulated salivary secretion and xerostomia.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available