Abstract
Objective: Saliva can be used for screening and diagnostic purposes. Although multiple saliva collection methods are available, their use in children can be limited due to lack of cooperation, developmental stage, and age. The aim of this scoping review was to comprehensively appraise the different methods of saliva collection among both children and adolescents by assessing the available scientific literature. Methods: A literature search was performed using the databases PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Eligible studies on saliva collection methods among children and adolescents were included for this review. Results: The literature search identified 249 eligible articles, of which 205 had a cross-sectional study design. Four distinct saliva collection methods have surfaced: the drooling method, the absorption method, the spitting method, and the suction method. Among infants or children under the age of 6 years, the suction and absorption methods were most preferred. The drooling and spitting methods were only applicable among children above the age of 3 years. When children were not willing to cooperate, the absorption method was most feasible. In adolescents and older children, no specific method was found to be preferred over another method. Conclusion: Overall, saliva collection is well tolerated by children and adolescents, with the absorption and suction methods being preferred with young and uncooperative children.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 15-26 |
Number of pages | 12 |
Journal | Molecular Diagnosis and Therapy |
Volume | 28 |
Issue number | 1 |
Early online date | 10 Nov 2023 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Jan 2024 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article. J. M. H. Fey and D. Hesse have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. F. J. Bikker, is financially supported by a research grant from Health-Holland, Top Sector Life Sciences & Health with grant number R/011124.03.02.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023, The Author(s).
Funding
The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article. J. M. H. Fey and D. Hesse have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. F. J. Bikker, is financially supported by a research grant from Health-Holland, Top Sector Life Sciences & Health with grant number R/011124.03.02.