Comparable Effectiveness of Novel and Commercial Saliva Substitute Gels in Dental Patients Experiencing Xerostomia: A Randomized, Double-Blind Crossover Trial

Saliva substitutes are the standard treatment for dry mouth. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of a novel artificial saliva gel (RSU gel) compared with a commercial product (GC Dry Mouth Gel<sup>®</sup>). A randomized, double-blind, two-phase crossover clinical trial was conducted with 37 participants with xerostomia. In the short-term phase, oral wetness, xerostomia scores, and clinical score of oral dryness (CSOD) were assessed up to 60 min after a single gel application. In the short-term repeated-use phase, each gel was applied 4 times daily for 14 days, separated by a 14-day washout period. The same parameters, including patient satisfaction and adverse events, were re-evaluated. Data were analyzed using generalized linear mixed models and generalized estimating equations. Both the RSU and GC Dry Mouth Gel<sup>®</sup> significantly improved oral wetness immediately after a single application. No significant difference was observed for the RSU gel relative to the GC Dry Mouth Gel<sup>®</sup> for oral wetness (OR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.98, 1.04, <i>p</i> = 0.248), xerostomia score (OR = 1.10, 95% CI 0.42, 2.88, <i>p</i> = 0.661), or CSOD (OR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.58, 1.55, <i>p</i> = 0.765) at 60 min. After 14 days of use, oral wetness increased significantly in both groups (2.94%, 95% CI 0.30%, 5.76%, <i>p</i> = 0.030) and did not differ significantly between the two products (<i>p</i> = 0.110). The xerostomia scores and CSOD also significantly improved, independent of product type (OR = 7.21, 95% CI 2.56, 20.34, <i>p</i> < 0.001, and OR = 2.82, 95% CI 1.50, 5.32, <i>p</i> = 0.001, respectively). The participants reported high satisfaction and acceptable taste, and no adverse effects were detected in those using the RSU gel throughout the study. Its lower cost and local availability make it a practical option for xerostomia management, particularly in populations with limited access to commercial saliva substitutes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Gels
Published
2026-01-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/gels12010061
Primary Topic
Salivary Gland Disorders and Functions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparable Effectiveness of Novel and Commercial Saliva Substitute Gels in Dental Patients Experiencing Xerostomia: A Randomized, Double-Blind Crossover Trial

Supanee Thanakun, W Kajornwongwattana, Chanchanan Kobutr, Thanapat Songsak et al.
Gels
Salivary Gland Disorders and Functions
article

Comparable Effectiveness of Novel and Commercial Saliva Substitute Gels in Dental Patients Experiencing Xerostomia: A Randomized, Double-Blind Crossover Trial

Supanee Thanakun, W Kajornwongwattana, Chanchanan Kobutr, Thanapat Songsak, Pornpailin Vasusopon, Boonruthai Wattanaurai, Chayapa Parnnium, Suchada Vuddhakanok, Kankanit Konta, Supitchaya Lomloy
article en

Abstract

Saliva substitutes are the standard treatment for dry mouth. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of a novel artificial saliva gel (RSU gel) compared with a commercial product (GC Dry Mouth Gel<sup>®</sup>). A randomized, double-blind, two-phase crossover clinical trial was conducted with 37 participants with xerostomia. In the short-term phase, oral wetness, xerostomia scores, and clinical score of oral dryness (CSOD) were assessed up to 60 min after a single gel application. In the short-term repeated-use phase, each gel was applied 4 times daily for 14 days, separated by a 14-day washout period. The same parameters, including patient satisfaction and adverse events, were re-evaluated. Data were analyzed using generalized linear mixed models and generalized estimating equations. Both the RSU and GC Dry Mouth Gel<sup>®</sup> significantly improved oral wetness immediately after a single application. No significant difference was observed for the RSU gel relative to the GC Dry Mouth Gel<sup>®</sup> for oral wetness (OR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.98, 1.04, <i>p</i> = 0.248), xerostomia score (OR = 1.10, 95% CI 0.42, 2.88, <i>p</i> = 0.661), or CSOD (OR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.58, 1.55, <i>p</i> = 0.765) at 60 min. After 14 days of use, oral wetness increased significantly in both groups (2.94%, 95% CI 0.30%, 5.76%, <i>p</i> = 0.030) and did not differ significantly between the two products (<i>p</i> = 0.110). The xerostomia scores and CSOD also significantly improved, independent of product type (OR = 7.21, 95% CI 2.56, 20.34, <i>p</i> < 0.001, and OR = 2.82, 95% CI 1.50, 5.32, <i>p</i> = 0.001, respectively). The participants reported high satisfaction and acceptable taste, and no adverse effects were detected in those using the RSU gel throughout the study. Its lower cost and local availability make it a practical option for xerostomia management, particularly in populations with limited access to commercial saliva substitutes.

GelsVol. 12(1)
Kasetsart University (TH), Rangsit University (TH)
Rangsit University
Openalex Percentile: Top 94%
Salivary Gland Disorders and Functions
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.