A Pilot Study of the Waterless Empirical Taste Test.

Objectives: This study was performed to test the clinical applicability of a new taste test-the waterless empirical taste test (WETT).

Methods: Sixty healthy volunteers and 20 patients with oral cancer were enrolled. They all received the conventional solution-based whole-mouth suprathreshold taste test (WMTT), which contained sucrose, citric acid, sodium chloride, and caffeine solutions for tastants, along with the WETT. The WETT used plastic strips to deliver tastants. The strip was embedded with sucrose, citric acid, sodium chloride, caffeine, or monosodium glutamate taste enhancer in 4 different concentrations. Each strip was tested twice. Thirty of the healthy volunteers received the WETT again to measure a retest reliability. Case-control matching by age and gender was used to compare the scores of WMTT and WETT between 13 healthy volunteers and 13 patients with oral cancer.

Results: The correlation was not high between the WMTT and WETT ( < 0.7) whether in the healthy volunteers or in patients with oral cancer. In terms of retest reliability of the WETT, the mean total score was 24.9 ± 7.3 for the first test and 25.8 ± 8.4 for the second test. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.85 ( < .001). When case-control matching was performed, the WMTT scores were not significantly different between 13 healthy volunteers and 13 patients with oral cancer ( = .266), but the WETT scores were significantly lower in patients with oral cancer ( = .017).

Conclusion: This study showed that the results of the WETT were not highly correlated with those of the WMTT. However, its retest reliability was high, and its results were significantly different between the healthy volunteers and the patients with oral cancer.