Skip to main content

Table 4 Association between anticholinergic burden or anticholinergic use and xerostomia and xerophthalmia

From: Association between anticholinergic activity and xerostomia and/ or xerophthalmia in the elderly: systematic review

Relation studied

Study. year

Scale

Peripherical adverse effect

Patient’s groups compared when looking for a correlation

Association

Association magnitude

Anticholinergic drug use and peripheral effects

Thomson WM. 1993

No Scale

Xerostomia

Occurrence of reported dry mouth in patients taking anticholinergics drugs vs patient not taken

+

50% vs 19% (p = 0.02) b

Katz IR. 1988

No Scale

Xerostomia

Dry mouth reported by patients that taking anticholinergics drugs (PNS + CNS) vs patients not taking anticholinergic drugs

+

69% vs 29% (p < 0.05) c

Xerostomia

Dry mouth reported by patients that taking anticholinergics drugs (CNS) vs patients not taking anticholinergic drugs

+

64% vs 29% (p < 0.05) c

Ness J. 2006

No Scale

Xerostomia

Used at least 1 anticholinergic agent vs did not use any anticholinergic

+

−0.7((−1.1)-0.3) (p < 0.01)d

Xerophthalmia

−0.2 ((−0.3)-(−0.1) (p = 0.39)d

Desoutter A. 2011

No Scale

Xerostomia

Patients with anticholinergics drug use vs patients without anticholinergic drugs

+

1.35 (1.05–1.73) (p = 0.02)e

Anticholinergic burden and peripheral effects

Rudolph JL. 2008

ARS

Peripheral adverse eventsa

Retrospective cohort: ARS = 0, ARS = 1–2 vs ARS ≥ 3

+

1.4 (1.0–1.9)f

Prospective cohort ARS = 0,ARS = 1–2 vs ARS ≥ 3

+

2.1 (1.5–2.9)f

Kersten H. 2012

ADS

Xerostomia

ADS = 3 vs ADS = 4

0.0 (−0.3-(0.3))g

ADS = 3 vs ADS = 5

− 0.1 (− 0.3-(0.2))g

ADS = 3 vs ADS≥6

+

−0.4 (− 0.7-(0.1)) (p < 0.001)g

Kersten H. 2013

ADS

Xerostomia

Intervention group vs control group

−0.07 (− 0.21–0.07) (p = 0.34)h

Tiisanoja A. 2017

ADS

Salivary estimulated secretion

ADS = 0 vs ADS≥3

1.50 (0.80–2.81) i

Salivary unestimulated secretion

ADS = 0 vs ADS≥3

+

2.31 (1.22–4.43)i

Xerostomia

ADS = 0 vs ADS≥3

+

3.17 (1.44–6.96)i

Inkeri NM. 2019

ARS

Xerophthalmia

ARS = 0 vs ARS > 0

No numerical data available

Diabetic patients with ARS = 0 vs diabetic patients with ARS > 0

Xerostomia

ARS = 0 vs ARS > 0

No numerical data available

Diabetic patients with ARS = 0 vs diabetic patients with ARS > 0

Lavrador M. 2021

ARS

Xerophthalmia

Differences between the median of anticholinergic burden scale scores in patients with xerostomia or xeropthalmia vs the median of anticholinergic burden scale scores in patients without xerostomia or xeropthalmia

+

1.0 vs 0.0 (p = 0.001)j

Xerostomia

+

1.0 vs 0.0 (p < 0.001)j

ADS

Xerophthalmia

+

2.0 vs 2.0 (p = 0.020)j

Xerostomia

+

2.0 vs 1.5 (p < 0.001)j

ACB

Xerophthalmia

+

3.0 vs 1.0 (p < 0.001)j

Xerostomia

+

2.0 vs 1.0 (p < 0.001)j

DBI

Xerophthalmia

+

0.96 vs 0.50 (p < 0.001)j

Xerostomia

+

0.75 vs 0.13 (p < 0.001)j

  1. aPeripherical adverse effects: adverse effects include dry mouth, dry eyes and constipation. bChi square test; c Pearson χ2; dAnalysis of variance for continuous variables; eOdd Ratio, predictors of xerostomia identified by multivariable analysis; fRelative Risk adjusted for age and number of medications; gAnalysis of covariance performed with log-transformed data; hAnalysis of covariance between the groups analysed; IRelative Risk adjusted by age, gender, education, diabetes and rheumatoid disease, and the Functional Comorbidity Index by a Poisson regression model; jMann-Whitney test
  2. ACB: Anticholinergic Cognitive Burden Scale; ADS: Anticholinergic Drug Scale; ARS: Anticholinergic Risk Scale; CNS: central nervous system; DBI: Drug Burden Index; PNS: peripheral nervous system;