An interventional study of Mouth Educational Program and Care as Usual in Xerostomia, End of Life and Frailty, sponsored by Leiden University Medical Center. Completed at 1 site in Netherlands. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-04-21.
Sponsored by Leiden University Medical Center · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
The goal of this cluster based intervention trial is to evaluate the effect of a nurse-led patient education program on dry mouth in patients with a life-limiting condition or frailty.
The Mouth Educational Program (MEP) is a nurse-led patient education program, in which trained nurses use current clinical, palliative dry mouth guidelines in a structured manner to discuss causes, consequences and interventions with the patients and to create an appropriate treatment plan. This intervention will be compared to a control group receiving care as usual.
Therefore, the main question it aims to answer is:
Does a nurse-led patient education program reduce dry mouth complaints in patients with a life-limiting condition or frailty?
Participants will be asked to answer questionnaires and, when part of the intervention group, partake in the Mouth Educational Program (MEP).
254 studies on the registry are indexed under Xerostomia; 47 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 70 is above the median of 42 across 216 interventional studies indexed under Xerostomia.
Browse Xerostomia studies →Leiden University Medical Center is the lead sponsor of 326 studies on the registry; 106 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Exclusion Criteria:
In the intervention group, the nurse and participant will be using the Mouth Education Program (MEP) to discuss causes, consequences and interventions for dry mouth in a structured manner, ultimately leading to an appropriate, individual treatment plan. The MEP is based on current clinical, national palliative care guidelines on dry mouth care.
Other: Mouth Educational Program
The control group will receive care as usual, provided by their trusted, treating clinicians and care teams. Questionnaires will be administered by researchers.
Other: Care as Usual
The Mouth Educational Program is a nurse-led patient education program for dry mouth in patients with a life-limiting condition or frailty.
Care as usual is defined as the standard dry mouth care as provided by participants' own treating physicians.
Percentage responders at week 4, as compared to baseline in both groups
A responder is defined as a participant with a clinically relevant response, i.e. at least a 2-point reduction on the 11-point Numeric Rating Score (NRS) for dry mouth severity. The NRS ranges from 0=no dry mouth to 10=worst possible dry mouth.
Time frame: Baseline to Week 4
Change in mean Numeric Rating Score (NRS) for dry mouth severity upon MEP participation, as compared to the control group
Change in mean NRS dry mouth scores in the MEP group at all time-points when compared to the control group. The NRS ranges from 0=no dry mouth to 10=worst possible dry mouth.
Time frame: Baseline to week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Percentage responders at week 8 and 12, as compared to baseline in both groups
A responder is defined as a participant with a clinically relevant response, i.e. at least a 2-point reduction on the 11-point Numeric Rating Score (NRS) for dry mouth severity. The NRS ranges from 0=no dry mouth to 10=worst possible dry mouth.
Time frame: Baseline to Week 8 and 12
Change in dry mouth symptoms upon MEP participation as compared to the control group
Dry mouth symptoms are measured by the summated Xerostomia Inventory-Dutch Version (sXI-D). The sXI-D contains 5 items adressing dry mouth in general, dry mouth during eating, difficulty eating, difficulty swallowing and dry lips. Here, three items have been added: oral pain, difficulty speaking and change in taste. The sXI-D scale ranges from 0=never, 1=occassionally to 2=often.
Time frame: Baseline to week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Change in Oral Health-Related Quality of Life (OHRQoL) upon MEP participation, as compared to the control group
The OHRQoL is measured using the validated Dutch version of the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI-NL). The GOHAI-NL contains 12 items in three categories: phsyical function, psychosocial function and pain/discomfort, and uses a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0=never to 5=often/always.
Time frame: Week 4 to Week 8 and 12
Change in clinical functioning upon MEP participation, as compared to the control group
Clinical functioning is examined by a patient-reported functional status (PRFS) scale. The PRFS was originally part of the validated Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA) but has also been validated as a stand-alone measure. Activities and function are measured on a five-point scale, with the following definitions: 0= normal with no limitations, 1=not my normal self, but able to be up and about with fairly normal activities, 2=not feeling up to most things, but in bed or chair less than half of the day, 3=able to do little activity and spend most of the day in bed or chair, 4=bed ridden, rarely out of bed.
Time frame: Baseline to week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Change in Global Perceived Effect by participants upon MEP participation, as compared to the control group
GPE by participants is determined using a 7-point GPE scale. The GPE addresses perceived improvement of their condition, ranging from 1=very good, 2=good, 3=fairly good, 4=same as before, 5=fairly bad, 6=bad, 7=very bad.
Time frame: Baseline to week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Change in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) upon MEP participation, as compared to the control group
The HRQoL is assessed using the EuroQoL five-demensional five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L). The EQ-4D-4L contains five dimensions of health: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression. Each dimension has 5 answer categories (levels): 0=no problems, 1=some problems, 2=moderate problems, 3=severe problems, and 4=extreme problems/unable to.
Time frame: Baseline to week 2, 4, 8 and 12
Current clinical practices in dry mouth care as reported by health care professionals in both the control and intervention group (nurses and medical doctors)
Current clinical practices for dry mouth care as reported by health care professionals are examined by a self-developed questionnaire, including questions (open-ended and multiple choice) on work experience and education and on all aspects of clinical practice for dry mouth care (such as initial identification of dry mouth symptoms, medical anamnesis, physical examination, interventions/treatment and monitoring, and use of guidelines). The questionnaire will be administered to all participating nurses in the intervention and control group, and supplemented by at least one medical doctor per study site.
Time frame: At baseline and upon full study completion per study site (expected after an average of 1 year)
Current clinical practices in dry mouth care as experienced by participants in the control group
Participants' experiences in the control group (receiving care as usual) with dry mouth care are examined by individual semi-structured interviews.
Time frame: Week 12
Barriers and facilitators of the MEP as perceived by nurses participating in the intervention group.
Barriers and facilitators as perceived by nurses leading the MEP consultations are identified through a questionnaire, adapted from the validated Dutch Implementation of an Innovation questionnaire. This questionnaire includes personal, logistic, financial, educational and work environment barriers and facilitators.
Time frame: Upon study completion, after an average of 1 year
Barriers, facilitators and overall applicability of the MEP as a means to structurally implement the existing guidelines as perceived by nurses participating in the intervention group.
The barriers, facilitators and overall applicability of the MEP as perceived by the nurses leading the MEP consultations is further explored in focus groups.
Time frame: Upon study completion, after an average of 1 year
Barriers and facilitators of the MEP as perceived by participants in the intervention group.
Experiences with the MEP and received care, including barriers and facilitators, by participants in the intervention group are examined by individual semi-structured interviews.
Time frame: Upon study completion, after an average of 1 year
Barriers and facilitators of the current guidelines for dry mouth care in the Netherlands as perceived by nurses in both the intervention and control group.
Barriers and facilitators of the current guidelines are examined in focus groups with nurses from either arm.
Time frame: Upon study completion, after an average of 1 year
Cost-effectiveness Analysis (CEA) of the MEP, as compared to the control group
The CEA is based upon patient-reported medical costs as measured by the Institute for Medical Technology Assessment (iMTA) Medical Consumption Questionnaire (iMCQ). It encompasses use of medical and paramedical treatments or services, in- and outpatient care and use of medication. Here, the questionnaire consists of three main questions asking for the frequency of contact with dental services, the frequency of contact with health care professionals across different disciplines and the purchase of dry mouth treatment products (e.g. medication and other aids) in the last four weeks.
Time frame: Week 0, 4, 8 and 12.
Plan to share: Yes — The full IPD sharing plan or data sharing agreement can be provided upon request, but is based on the FAIR data sharing principles.
Supporting information: Study protocol, Sap, Icf
This study is completed, as verified in Apr 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Leiden University Medical Center