Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: To map the available evidence on direct oral healthcare costs associated with xerostomia and hyposalivation. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science, with additional screening of gray literature. Studies reporting direct oral healthcare costs associated with xerostomia or/and hyposalivation were eligible. Reported costs were standardized to a common currency and price year. Exploratory annual cost scenarios were generated by combining reported unit costs with reported guideline-based or hypothetical frequencies. RESULTS: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Six (75%) were conducted in the United States and two (25%) in the United Kingdom. Reported cost components included dental consultations, salivary stimulants and substitutes, restorative treatments, dental implants, fluoride applications, and management of oral infections. Evidence was heterogeneous in populations, etiologies, healthcare settings, cost components, and reporting methods. Illustrative base-case scenarios ranged from USD 3296.08 to USD 10,414.51 per patient per year (USD 1791.23-5658.99 when hypothetical events and possible overlaps were excluded). CONCLUSION: The evidence base is limited and heterogeneous. The exploratory annual synthesis provides an initial framework for mapping reported cost components but does not represent a definitive estimate of economic burden.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dutra et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: