Dysphagia

, 6:211

Masticatory ability in experimentally induced xerostomia

  • Birgitta Liedberg
  • Bengt Öwall
Article

Abstract

The masticatory ability of 15 nondysphagic volunteers with complete natural dentition was tested using different chewing parameters including preparation of a two-color plastic chewing gum (bolus shape, and color mixture), particle reduction of a piece of silicone, and number of strokes before swallow of almonds. The tests were performed under conditions of normal salivation and experimental oral dryness caused by intramuscular injection of methylscopolamine. The chewing gum tests as well as the silicone particle reduction tests were not influenced by lack of salivation. The number of chewing strokes prior to the initiation of swallowing of almonds was significantly increased. Oral dryness seems to cause accumulation of particles in the oral cavity from friable food and the particulate material is not transported posteriorly into a “readyto-swallow” positioning. The absorption of saliva by dry oral content such as an almond further impaired oral manipulation of food.

Key words

Experimental xerostomia Chewing Oral function Swallowing Deglutition Deglutition disorders 

References

  1. 1.
    Bertram U: Xerostomi.Odontologi 77, Munksgaard: Copenhagen, 1977, pp. 31–42.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sreebny LM, Valtini A: Xerostomia. A neglected symptom.Arch Intern Med 147: 1333–1337, 1987PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sessle BJ: How are mastication and swallowing programmed and regulated. In Sessle BJ, Hannam AG (eds):Mastication and Swallowing. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1976, pp 161–171.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lucas PW, Luke DA: Is food particle size a criteria for the initiation of swallowing?J Oral Rehab 13: 127–136, 1986Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sonies BC, Ship JA, Baum BJ: Relationship between saliva production and oropharyngeal swallow in healthy, differentaged adults.Dysphagia 4: 85–89, 1989PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Edlund J, Lamm CJ: Masticatory efficiency.J Oral Rehab 17: 123–130, 1980Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ericsson Y: Clinical investigation of the salivary buffering action.Acta Odontol Scand 17: 131–165, 1959Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fox PC, van der Ven PF, Sonies BC, Weiffenbach JM, Baum BJ: Xerostomia: evaluation of a symptom with increasing significance.J Am Dent Assoc 110: 519–525, 1985PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ettinger R: Xerostomia: a complication of aging.Aust Dent J 26: 365–371, 1981PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bates JF, Stafford GD, Harrison A: Masticatory function—a review of the literature III. Masticatory performance and efficiency.J Oral Rehab 3: 57–67, 1976Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gunne HSJ: Masticatory efficiency and dental state.Acta Odont Scand 43: 139–146, 1985PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ericsson Y, Hardwick L: Individual diagnosis, prognosis and counselling for caries prevention.Caries Res 12 (Suppl 1): 94–102, 1978PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heintze U, Frostell G, Lindgärde F, Trell E: Secretion rate and buffer effect of resting and stimulated whole saliva in relation to general health.Swed Dent J 10: 213–219, 1986PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Henricsson V, Svensson A, Axell T: Device for measuring dryness of the oral mucosa.Scand J Rheumatol Suppl 61: 190–193, 1986PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Månsson I, Sandberg N: Salivary stimulus and swallowing reflex in man.Acta Otolaryngol 79: 445–450, 1975PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Birgitta Liedberg
    • 1
  • Bengt Öwall
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Oral DiagnosisDental School of MalmöMalmöSweden
  2. 2.Department of Prosthetic Dentistry and Stomatognathic PhysiologyRoyal Dental CollegeAarhus CDenmark

Personalised recommendations