Evidence Hub

Dry mouth in palliative care: A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines around the world

A. van der Meulen, A. Stoppelenburg, M. Theunissen, E. D. de Nijs, M. H. J. van den Beuken-van Everdingen, Y. M. van der Linden

Palliative Medicine, 2026

68 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Background: Dry mouth is a disruptive symptom in patients with life-limiting illnesses. It has one of the highest symptom burdens in palliative care and a significant impact on quality of life. Nonetheless, dry mouth remains an underacknowledged and undertreated symptom with limited evidence-based interventions. Aim: To examine the quality and content of guidelines for the treatment of dry mouth in patients with life-limiting illnesses. Design: A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines was conducted (preregistered in PROSPERO in 2023). PRISMA reporting guidelines were followed. The search strategy involved 4 scientific databases and 9 guideline databases, targeted searches and stakeholder outreach for 183 countries/regions. Quality and content were analysed using the AGREE II instrument and directed content analysis, respectively. Data sources: Seventy-two clinical practice guidelines from 42 countries across 6 continents were included. Results: Only two guidelines were recommended for use based on the AGREE II quality appraisal. Four main themes emerged from the content analysis: (1) Assessment of dry mouth by medical history, oral examination and measuring instruments (n = 32, n = 36 and n = 19 guidelines respectively); (2) Oral care (n = 68); (3) Management by treating causes (n = 40), saliva substitutes (n = 66) and stimulants (n = 62), diet (n = 45), and medication (n = 40); and (4) Patient and family involvement (n = 43). Conclusion: Despite differences in…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 68 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free