Linked Life Data

9616446

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/9616446

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
2
pubmed:dateCreated
1998-6-25
pubmed:abstractText
This was a crossover study comparing a mucin-based artificial saliva (Saliva Orthana) and pilocarpine hydrochloride (Salagen) in the management of xerostomia in patients with advanced cancer. The pilocarpine was found to be more effective than the artificial saliva in terms of mean change in visual analogue scale scores for xerostomia (P = 0.003). Furthermore, more patients reported that it had helped their xerostomia, and more patients wanted to continue with it after the study. However, the pilocarpine was found to be associated with more side-effects than the artificial saliva (P < 0.001). These side-effects were usually reported as being mild. Of the patients who used both treatments, 50% preferred the artificial saliva, and 50% preferred the pilocarpine. The commonest reason for preferring the artificial saliva was the fact that it was a spray, rather than a tablet.
pubmed:commentsCorrections
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:chemical
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Mar
pubmed:issn
0269-2163
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
12
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
105-11
pubmed:dateRevised
2004-11-17
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1998
pubmed:articleTitle
A comparison of artificial saliva and pilocarpine in the management of xerostomia in patients with advanced cancer.
pubmed:affiliation
St Christopher's Hospice, London, UK.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Clinical Trial, Randomized Controlled Trial, Multicenter Study