Cross-sectional survey reveals severe xerostomia impacts oral health quality in head and neck cancer survivors, highlighting the need for better management.
Purpose Radiotherapy for head and neck cancer frequently results in radiation-induced xerostomia, a chronic symptom that can persist long-term and compromise oral function and survivorship. Methods A cross-sectional, non-interventional survey was conducted using a mixed recruitment approach (department-based and nationwide online dissemination). Xerostomia prevalence, symptom characteristics, coping strategies, and oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) were assessed using a study-specific xerostomia questionnaire and the validated OHIP-G14 instrument. Overall, 253 questionnaires were returned (202 complete and 51 partial), including 163 completed online via LimeSurvey and 39 completed on paper during routine follow-up visits at the tumour clinic of the department. Results Xerostomia was reported by 90% of respondents; 53.1% described the daily burden as strong/very strong. Patients with xerostomia had significantly worse OHRQoL than those without (mean OHIP-G14 26.7 vs. 17.3; p < 0.001), corresponding to a clinically relevant mean difference of 9.4 points. In multivariable linear regression, xerostomia remained independently associated with worse OHRQoL (B = 8.86, p < 0.001). Functional impairment and oral pain were more pronounced than psychosocial or aesthetic domains, and perceived xerostomia severity correlated with OHIP scores. Commonly used coping strategies included frequent water intake (81%), sugar-free gum/lozenges (46%), saliva substitutes (43%), and home remedies (e.g., oil or tea) (33%); prescription sialogogues were infrequently used (15%) and perceived as less effective. Conclusion Post-radiotherapy xerostomia is highly prevalent and independently associated with clinically meaningful OHRQoL impairment, underscoring the need for optimized counselling and structured supportive care. Management was dominated by low-threshold behavioural strategies, while prescription sialogogues were used by only a minority of respondents and were rated less effective in terms of perceived benefit.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hoene et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: