OBJECTIVE: The association of candy weight loss rate (CWLR) with whole saliva flow rates (WSFRs) was analyzed. STUDY DESIGN: The unstimulated whole saliva flow rate (UWSFR), stimulated whole saliva flow rate by the gum test (SWSFR-GT) and stimulated whole saliva flow rate by the Saxon test (SWSFR-ST) were measured in 300 healthy young adults. CWLR was measured by passively holding sugar candy between the tongue dorsum and hard palate. The degree of discomfort was evaluated by the visual analog scale. RESULTS: CWLR was significantly correlated with UWSFR, SWSFR-GT, and SWSFR-ST with Pearson's correlation coefficients of 0.1847 (P = .0013), 0.2097 (P = .0003), and 0.2332 (P < .0001), respectively; however, these were much smaller than those of 0.6858 (P < .0001) between UWSFR and SWSFR-GT, 0.5071 (P < .0001) between UWSFR and SWSFR-ST, and 0.5424 (P < .0001) between SWSFR-GT and SWSFR-ST. The degree of discomfort was significantly lower in the measurement of CWLR than in any WSFRs (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: CWLR cannot be used as an independent alternative to WSFRs, although it can be measured with less discomfort.
OBJECTIVE: The association of candy weight loss rate (CWLR) with whole saliva flow rates (WSFRs) was analyzed. STUDY DESIGN: The unstimulated whole saliva flow rate (UWSFR), stimulated whole saliva flow rate by the gum test (SWSFR-GT) and stimulated whole saliva flow rate by the Saxon test (SWSFR-ST) were measured in 300 healthy young adults. CWLR was measured by passively holding sugar candy between the tongue dorsum and hard palate. The degree of discomfort was evaluated by the visual analog scale. RESULTS: CWLR was significantly correlated with UWSFR, SWSFR-GT, and SWSFR-ST with Pearson's correlation coefficients of 0.1847 (P = .0013), 0.2097 (P = .0003), and 0.2332 (P < .0001), respectively; however, these were much smaller than those of 0.6858 (P < .0001) between UWSFR and SWSFR-GT, 0.5071 (P < .0001) between UWSFR and SWSFR-ST, and 0.5424 (P < .0001) between SWSFR-GT and SWSFR-ST. The degree of discomfort was significantly lower in the measurement of CWLR than in any WSFRs (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: CWLR cannot be used as an independent alternative to WSFRs, although it can be measured with less discomfort.