| Literature DB >> 25428655 |
Maximilian Satzl1, Albrecht Schmierer, Florian Zeman, Gottfried Schmalz, Thomas Loew.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Most dental procedures require a dry working environment. Although many evaporative drying methods are available, an additional reduction of salivary flow would often be helpful.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25428655 PMCID: PMC4289223 DOI: 10.1186/1746-160X-10-49
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Head Face Med ISSN: 1746-160X Impact factor: 2.151
Figure 1Patient flow-diagram.
Baseline characteristics
| All, 31 patients | Sequence direct- indirect, 16 patients | Sequence indirect- direct, 15 patients | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 34 (12) | 36 (15) | 32 (10) |
|
| 2.6 (1.9) | 2.5 (1.3) | 2.6 (2.4) |
|
| |||
| Male | 13 (42%) | 6 (37.5%) | 7 (47%) |
| Female | 18 (58%) | 10 (62.5%) | 8 (53%) |
|
| 5 (16%) | 3 (19%) | 2 (13%) |
|
| 1 (3%) | 0 (0%) | 1 (6%) |
|
| 1 (3%) | 1 (6%) | 0 (0%) |
Figure 2Boxplots of salivation quantity for baseline and suggestion measurements.
Linear mixed model
| Baseline, first period | Direct suggestion | Indirect suggestion | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Salivation [ml] | 2.55 (SD 1.88) | 1.09 (SD 0.96) | 1.62 (SD 1.53) |
| ΔSalivation [ml] | 1.46 (SD 2.08) | 0.94 (SD 2.42) | |
| p-value | <0.001 | 0.039 | |
| ΔSalivation between direct and indirect suggestion, [ml] | -0.53 (95%-CI: -0.83, -0.23)* | ||
| p-value | 0.0012 | ||
Period effect: p = 0.28, carryover effect: p = 0.38, *Estimated according to the linear mixed model, 95%-CI: 95%-Confidence interval.
Figure 3Salivation quantity on subject basis for baseline and suggestion measurements. The bold black line represents the mean salivation rate of all subjects reacting on both suggestion methods. The grey lines represent individual subjects not reacting on one or both suggestions.