-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2021Stroke can affect people's ability to swallow, resulting in passage of some food and drink into the airway. This can cause choking, chest infection, malnutrition and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Stroke can affect people's ability to swallow, resulting in passage of some food and drink into the airway. This can cause choking, chest infection, malnutrition and dehydration, reduced rehabilitation, increased risk of anxiety and depression, longer hospital stay, increased likelihood of discharge to a care home, and increased risk of death. Early identification and management of disordered swallowing reduces risk of these difficulties.
OBJECTIVES
Primary objective • To determine the diagnostic accuracy and the sensitivity and specificity of bedside screening tests for detecting risk of aspiration associated with dysphagia in people with acute stroke Secondary objectives • To assess the influence of the following sources of heterogeneity on the diagnostic accuracy of bedside screening tools for dysphagia - Patient demographics (e.g. age, gender) - Time post stroke that the study was conducted (from admission to 48 hours) to ensure only hyperacute and acute stroke swallow screening tools are identified - Definition of dysphagia used by the study - Level of training of nursing staff (both grade and training in the screening tool) - Low-quality studies identified from the methodological quality checklist - Type and threshold of index test - Type of reference test SEARCH METHODS: In June 2017 and December 2019, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database via the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination; the reference lists of included studies; and grey literature sources. We contacted experts in the field to identify any ongoing studies and those potentially missed by the search strategy.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included studies that were single-gate or two-gate studies comparing a bedside screening tool administered by nurses or other healthcare professionals (HCPs) with expert or instrumental assessment for detection of aspiration associated with dysphagia in adults with acute stroke admitted to hospital.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened each study using the eligibility criteria and then extracted data, including the sensitivity and specificity of each index test against the reference test. A third review author was available at each stage to settle disagreements. The methodological quality of each study was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy (QUADAS-2) tool. We identified insufficient studies for each index test, so we performed no meta-analysis. Diagnostic accuracy data were presented as sensitivities and specificities for the index tests.
MAIN RESULTS
Overall, we included 25 studies in the review, four of which we included as narratives (with no accuracy statistics reported). The included studies involved 3953 participants and 37 screening tests. Of these, 24 screening tests used water only, six used water and other consistencies, and seven used other methods. For index tests using water only, sensitivity and specificity ranged from 46% to 100% and from 43% to 100%, respectively; for those using water and other consistencies, sensitivity and specificity ranged from 75% to 100% and from 69% to 90%, respectively; and for those using other methods, sensitivity and specificity ranged from 29% to 100% and from 39% to 86%, respectively. Twenty screening tests used expert assessment or the Mann Assessment of Swallowing Ability (MASA) as the reference, six used fibreoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES), and 11 used videofluoroscopy (VF). Fifteen screening tools had an outcome of aspiration risk, 20 screening tools had an outcome of dysphagia, and two narrative papers did not report the outcome. Twenty-one screening tests were carried out by nurses, and 16 were carried out by other HCPs (not including speech and language therapists (SLTs)). We assessed a total of six studies as low risk across all four QUADAS-2 risk of bias domains, and we rated 15 studies as low concern across all three applicability domains. No single study demonstrated 100% sensitivity and specificity with low risk of bias for all domains. The best performing combined water swallow and instrumental tool was the Bedside Aspiration test (n = 50), the best performing water plus other consistencies tool was the Gugging Swallowing Screen (GUSS; n = 30), and the best water only swallow screening tool was the Toronto Bedside Swallowing Screening Test (TOR-BSST; n = 24). All tools demonstrated combined highest sensitivity and specificity and low risk of bias for all domains. However, clinicians should be cautious in their interpretation of these findings, as these tests are based on single studies with small sample sizes, which limits the estimates of reliability of screening tests.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We were unable to identify a single swallow screening tool with high and precisely estimated sensitivity and specificity based on at least one trial with low risk of bias. However, we were able to offer recommendations for further high-quality studies that are needed to improve the accuracy and clinical utility of bedside screening tools.
Topics: Deglutition Disorders; Humans; Mass Screening; Reproducibility of Results; Sensitivity and Specificity; Stroke
PubMed: 34661279
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012679.pub2 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Sep 2017To estimate the benefits and harms of using corticosteroids as an adjunct treatment for sore throat. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised control... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
To estimate the benefits and harms of using corticosteroids as an adjunct treatment for sore throat. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised control trials. Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), trial registries up to May 2017, reference lists of eligible trials, related reviews. Randomised controlled trials of the addition of corticosteroids to standard clinical care for patients aged 5 or older in emergency department and primary care settings with clinical signs of acute tonsillitis, pharyngitis, or the clinical syndrome of sore throat. Trials were included irrespective of language or publication status. Reviewers identified studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the evidence, independently and in duplicate. A parallel guideline committee ( Rapid Recommendation) provided input on the design and interpretation of the systematic review, including the selection of outcomes important to patients. Random effects model was used for meta-analyses. Quality of evidence was assessed with the GRADE approach. 10 eligible trials enrolled 1426 individuals. Patients who received single low dose corticosteroids (the most common intervention was oral dexamethasone with a maximum dose of 10 mg) were twice as likely to experience pain relief after 24 hours (relative risk 2.2, 95% confidence interval 1.2 to 4.3; risk difference 12.4%; moderate quality evidence) and 1.5 times more likely to have no pain at 48 hours (1.5, 1.3 to 1.8; risk difference 18.3%; high quality). The mean time to onset of pain relief in patients treated with corticosteroids was 4.8 hours earlier (95% confidence interval -1.9 to -7.8; moderate quality) and the mean time to complete resolution of pain was 11.1 hours earlier (-0.4 to -21.8; low quality) than in those treated with placebo. The absolute pain reduction at 24 hours (visual analogue scale 0-10) was greater in patients treated with corticosteroids (mean difference 1.3, 95% confidence interval 0.7 to 1.9; moderate quality). Nine of the 10 trials sought information regarding adverse events. Six studies reported no adverse effects, and three studies reported few adverse events, which were mostly complications related to disease, with a similar incidence in both groups. Single low dose corticosteroids can provide pain relief in patients with sore throat, with no increase in serious adverse effects. Included trials did not assess the potential risks of larger cumulative doses in patients with recurrent episodes of acute sore throat. PROSPERO CRD42017067808.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Dexamethasone; Drug Administration Schedule; Humans; Pharyngitis; Tonsillitis
PubMed: 28931508
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.j3887 -
Intensive Care Medicine Jul 2020To determine the effectiveness of dysphagia interventions compared to standard care in improving oral intake and reducing aspiration for adults in acute and critical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To determine the effectiveness of dysphagia interventions compared to standard care in improving oral intake and reducing aspiration for adults in acute and critical care.
METHODS
We searched electronic literature for randomised and quasi-randomised trials and bibliography lists of included studies to March 2020. Study screening, data extraction, risk of bias and quality assessments were conducted independently by two reviewers. Meta-analysis used fixed effects modelling. The systematic review protocol is registered and published.
RESULTS
We identified 22 studies (19 stroke, 2 intensive care stroke and 1 general intensive care) testing 9 interventions and representing 1700 patients. Swallowing treatment showed no evidence of a difference in the time to return to oral intake (n = 33, MD (days) - 4.5, 95% CI - 10.6 to 1.6, 1 study, P = 0.15) (very low certainty) or in aspiration following treatment (n = 113, RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.45, 4 studies, I = 0%, P = 0.45) (low certainty). Swallowing treatment showed evidence of a reduced risk of pneumonia (n = 719, RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.89, 8 studies, I = 15%, P = 0.004) (low certainty) but no evidence of a difference in swallowing quality of life scores (n = 239, MD - 11.38, 95% CI - 23.83 to 1.08, I = 78%, P = 0.07) (very low certainty).
CONCLUSION
There is limited evidence for the effectiveness of swallowing treatments in the acute and critical care setting. Clinical trials consistently measuring patient-centred outcomes are needed.
Topics: Adult; Critical Care; Deglutition Disorders; Humans; Pneumonia; Quality of Life; Stroke
PubMed: 32514597
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-020-06126-y -
BMC Geriatrics Jul 2021Dysphagia is highly prevalent condition in older adults living in nursing homes. There is also evidence indicating that aspiration is one of the major health risks for... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Dysphagia is highly prevalent condition in older adults living in nursing homes. There is also evidence indicating that aspiration is one of the major health risks for these older adults, which is more likely to result in respiratory infections, aspiration pneumonia and sudden bolus death. Evidence syntheses have demonstrated the effectiveness of interventions for prevention of aspiration among hospitalized older people. The aim of this scoping review is to describe the current spread of interventions to prevent or reduce aspiration in older adults with dysphagia with a specific focus on those who reside in nursing homes.
METHODS
The Joanna Briggs Institute methods and PRISMA-ScR guidelines were used to inform this review. MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Joanna Briggs Institute EBP Database and Web of Science were searched for related articles from 2010 to 2020 as well as Chinese databases (CNKI, WANFANG DATA and VIP) and databases for unpublished material. A three-step search strategy was utilized, including the use of citation software to manage search results and de-duplication, abstract review and full-text review by two reviewers. Details of included studies were then extracted using a prepared data extraction tool. The resulting map was displayed in tabular form along with a narrative summary.
RESULTS
Although 637 articles were located, 19 papers were included in the final analysis. Interventions to prevent aspiration in older adults with dysphagia living in nursing homes included: more bedside evaluation, modification of dietary, creating an appropriate environment for swallowing, providing appropriate feeding assistance, appropriate posture or maneuver for swallowing, appropriate rehabilitation program, medication treatment, and stimulation treatment.
CONCLUSION
Nursing homes, particularly those in developing countries, require more support for staff training and necessary equipment. Professional interventions provided by speech and language therapists are still limited in the setting of nursing homes. Modification of dietary was the most frequently used intervention to prevent or reduce aspiration. Multi-disciplinary interventions had the best results for aspiration management, but for many nursing homes, access to such teams is limited. Nursing home residents respond well to person-centered interventions that have a comprehensive consideration of their degree of aspiration risk, health condition, individual feelings and cognitive state.
Topics: Aged; Deglutition; Deglutition Disorders; Humans; Nursing Homes
PubMed: 34273953
DOI: 10.1186/s12877-021-02366-9 -
Cells Jul 2022Studies investigating the associations of oral function and dysphagia with frailty and sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults are increasing; however, they have... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Studies investigating the associations of oral function and dysphagia with frailty and sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults are increasing; however, they have not been systematically summarized. We conducted a systematic review to investigate these associations. We searched electronic databases and synthesized relevant data using conventional (frequentist-style) and Bayesian meta-analyses. Twenty-four studies were found to be eligible for our review, including 20 cross-sectional and four prospective cohort studies. Older adults with frailty or sarcopenia had lower tongue pressure, according to the results of conventional meta-analysis (mean difference [95% confidence interval or credible interval]: -6.80 kPa [-10.22 to -3.38] for frailty and -5.40 kPa [-6.62 to -4.17] for sarcopenia) and Bayesian meta-analysis (-6.90 kPa [-9.0 to -4.8] for frailty, -5.35 kPa [-6.78 to -3.89] for sarcopenia). People with frailty had a higher odds ratio (OR) for dysphagia according to the results of conventional meta-analysis (3.99 [2.17 to 7.32]) and Bayesian meta-analysis (1.38 [0.77 to 1.98]). However, the results were inconclusive for people with sarcopenia. A prospective association could not be determined because of the lack of information and the limited number of studies. Decreased oral function and dysphagia can be important characteristics of frailty and sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults.
Topics: Aged; Bayes Theorem; Cross-Sectional Studies; Deglutition Disorders; Frailty; Humans; Independent Living; Pressure; Prospective Studies; Sarcopenia; Tongue
PubMed: 35883642
DOI: 10.3390/cells11142199 -
Clinical Nutrition ESPEN Jun 2022It is well known that oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) challenges eating, drinking, and swallowing by penetration to the airway. In clinical practice, thickening agents in...
Second update of a systematic review and evidence-based recommendations on texture modified foods and thickened liquids for adults (above 17 years) with oropharyngeal dysphagia.
BACKGROUND & AIMS
It is well known that oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) challenges eating, drinking, and swallowing by penetration to the airway. In clinical practice, thickening agents in liquid and texture modified diets are used to reduce pneumonia and secure nutritional status. The scientific evidence on this OD management is, however, limited. In 2016 we updated an original clinical guideline on OD in adults. Based on the strength of the evidence of two randomized control trials (RCTs), we provided a weak clinical recommendation against the use of thickening agents for liquid and none for diet. In the hope of finding new scientific evidence, we aimed to update the clinical guideline by examining the evidence if thickening of liquid and diet 1) improve survival and quality of life, 2) reduce the occurrence of aspiration risk and pneumonia, 3) improve dehydration, nutritional status, and mealtime performance, and 4) relate to patient preferences and intervention adherence.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. We first searched systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and secondly, the primary literature of RCTs. We undertook the search in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1, 2015, to May 19, 2021. The quality of the evidence was evaluated using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations: Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.
RESULTS
One new study was included, resulting in a total of three RCTs, of which two were already included in our former guideline. The three studies focused on the thickening of liquid, but no change of the former weak recommendation against the thickening of liquid could be made due to the quality of evidence evaluation.
CONCLUSION
There is no convincing evidence that thickened liquid or texture modified diet prevents death or pneumonia nor improves the quality of life, nutritional status, or oral intake in individuals with OD. There is a need for future studies to examine the effect and discuss outcome measures in OD management with thickening agents.
Topics: Adult; Deglutition; Deglutition Disorders; Diet; Humans; Meals; Pneumonia
PubMed: 35623866
DOI: 10.1016/j.clnesp.2022.03.039 -
Archives of Physical Medicine and... Jun 2022To investigate whether respiratory muscle training is capable of reducing the occurrence of respiratory complications and improving dysphagia (swallowing or cough... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To investigate whether respiratory muscle training is capable of reducing the occurrence of respiratory complications and improving dysphagia (swallowing or cough function) after stroke.
DATA SOURCES
Cochrane Library, Excerpta Medical Database (EMBASE), PUBMED, and Web of Science were searched for studies published in English; the China Biology Medicine (CBM), China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Database were searched for studies published in Chinese up to August 10, 2021.
STUDY SELECTION
Eleven randomized control trials (RCTs) (N=523) met the inclusion criteria were included in this systematic review.
DATA EXTRACTION
Data and information were extracted by two reviewers independently and disagreements was resolved by consensus with a third coauthor. Primary outcome was the occurrence of respiratory complications, secondary outcomes would be represented by swallowing and cough function. The quality of each included RCT were assessed by Cochrane risk-of-bias criteria and the GRADE evidence profile was provided to present information about the body of evidence and judgments about the certainty of underlying evidence for each outcome.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Respiratory muscle training reduced the risk of respiratory complications (relative risk, 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.93; I=0%; P=.03; absolute risk difference, 0.068; number need to treat, 14.71) compared with no or sham respiratory intervention. It also decreased the liquid-type Penetration-Aspiration Scale scores by 0.81 (95% CI, -1.19 to -0.43; I=39%; P<.0001). There was no significant association between respiratory muscle training and Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) scores, cough function: increased FOIS scores by 0.47 (95% CI, -0.45 to 1.39; I=55%; P=.32), decreased peak expiratory cough flow of voluntary cough by 18.70 L per minute (95% CI, -59.74 to 22.33; I=19%; P=.37) and increased peak expiratory cough flow of reflex cough by 0.05 L per minute (95% CI, -40.78 to 40.87; I=0%; P>.99).
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis provided evidence that respiratory muscle training is effective in reducing the risk of respiratory complications and improving dysphagia by reducing penetration or aspiration during swallowing liquid bolus after stroke. However, there was no sufficient evidence to determine that respiratory muscle training improves cough function. Additional multicenter studies using larger patient cohorts are required to validate and support these findings. Furthermore, long-term follow-up studies should be performed to measure outcomes, while avoiding bias due to confounding factors such as heterogeneity of the etiologies of dysphagia.
Topics: Breathing Exercises; Cough; Deglutition; Deglutition Disorders; Humans; Respiration Disorders; Stroke
PubMed: 34780729
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2021.10.020 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2015A number of conditions compromise the passage of food along the digestive tract. Nasogastric tube (NGT) feeding is a classic, time-proven technique, although its... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
A number of conditions compromise the passage of food along the digestive tract. Nasogastric tube (NGT) feeding is a classic, time-proven technique, although its prolonged use can lead to complications such as lesions to the nasal wing, chronic sinusitis, gastro-oesophageal reflux, and aspiration pneumonia. Another method of infusion, percutaneous endoscopy gastrostomy (PEG), is generally used when there is a need for enteral nutrition for a longer time period. There is a high demand for PEG in patients with swallowing disorders, although there is no consistent evidence about its effectiveness and safety as compared to NGT.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of PEG compared with NGT for adults with swallowing disturbances.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS from inception to January 2014, and contacted the main authors in the subject area. There was no language restriction in the search.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We planned to include randomised controlled trials comparing PEG versus NGT for adults with swallowing disturbances or dysphagia and indications for nutritional support, with any underlying diseases. The primary outcome was intervention failure (e.g. feeding interruption, blocking or leakage of the tube, no adherence to treatment).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. For dichotomous and continuous variables, we used risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD), respectively with the random-effects statistical model and 95% confidence interval (CI). We assumed statistical heterogeneity when I² > 50%.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 11 randomised controlled studies with 735 participants which produced 16 meta-analyses of outcome data. Meta-analysis indicated that the primary outcome of intervention failure, occurred in lower proportion of participants with PEG compared to NGT (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.59, eight studies, 408 participants, low quality evidence) and this difference was statistically significant. For this outcome, we also subgrouped the studies by endoscopic gastrostomy technique into pull, and push and not reported. We observed a significant difference favouring PEG in the pull subgroup (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.35, three studies, 90 participants). Thepush subgroup contained only one clinical trial and the result favoured PEG (RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.74, one study, 33 participants) techniques. We found no statistically significant difference in cases where the technique was not reported (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.44, four studies, 285 participants).There was no statistically significant difference between the groups for meta-analyses of the secondary outcomes of mortality (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.28, 644 participants, nine studies, very low quality evidence), overall reports of any adverse event at any follow-up time point (ITT analysis, RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.34), 597 participants, 6 studies, moderate quality evidence), specific adverse events including pneumonia (aspiration) (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.06, 645 participants, seven studies, low quality evidence), or for the meta- analyses of the secondary outcome of nutritional status including weight change from baseline, and mid-arm circumference at endpoint, although there was evidence in favour of PEG for meta-analyses of mid-arm circumference change from baseline (MD 1.16, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.31, 115 participants, two studies), and levels of serum albumin were higher in the PEG group (MD 6.03, 95% CI 2.31 to 9.74, 107 participants).For meta-analyses of the secondary outcomes of time on enteral nutrition, there was no statistically significant difference (MD 14.48, 95% CI -2.74 to 31.71; 119 participants, two studies). For meta-analyses of quality of life measures (EuroQol) outcomes in two studies with 133 participants, for inconvenience (RR 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.29), discomfort (RR 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.29), altered body image (RR 0.01, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.18; P = 0.001) and social activities (RR 0.01, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.18) the intervention favoured PEG, that is, fewer participants found the intervention of PEG to be inconvenient, uncomfortable or interfered with social activities. However, there were no significant differences between the groups for pain, ease of learning to use, or the secondary outcome of length of hospital stay (two studies, 381 participants).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
PEG was associated with a lower probability of intervention failure, suggesting the endoscopic procedure may be more effective and safe compared with NGT. There is no significant difference in mortality rates between comparison groups, or in adverse events, including pneumonia related to aspiration. Future studies should include details of participant demographics including underlying disease, age and gender, and the gastrostomy technique.
Topics: Adult; Deglutition Disorders; Enteral Nutrition; Gastrostomy; Humans; Intubation, Gastrointestinal; Malnutrition; Pneumonia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Failure
PubMed: 25997528
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008096.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2021Oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers are the most common cancers arising in the head and neck. Treatment of oral cavity cancer is generally surgery followed by... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers are the most common cancers arising in the head and neck. Treatment of oral cavity cancer is generally surgery followed by radiotherapy, whereas oropharyngeal cancers, which are more likely to be advanced at the time of diagnosis, are managed with radiotherapy or chemoradiation. Surgery for oral cancers can be disfiguring and both surgery and radiotherapy have significant functional side effects. The development of new chemotherapy agents, new combinations of agents and changes in the relative timing of surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy treatments may potentially bring about increases in both survival and quality of life for this group of patients. This review updates one last published in 2011.
OBJECTIVES
To determine whether chemotherapy, in addition to radiotherapy and/or surgery for oral cavity and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma results in improved overall survival, improved disease-free survival and/or improved locoregional control, when incorporated as either induction therapy given prior to locoregional treatment (i.e. radiotherapy or surgery), concurrent with radiotherapy or in the adjuvant (i.e. after locoregional treatment with radiotherapy or surgery) setting.
SEARCH METHODS
An information specialist searched 4 bibliographic databases up to 15 September 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished and ongoing studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where more than 50% of participants had primary tumours in the oral cavity or oropharynx, and that evaluated the addition of chemotherapy to other treatments such as radiotherapy and/or surgery, or compared two or more chemotherapy regimens or modes of administration.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
For this update, we assessed the new included trials for their risk of bias and at least two authors extracted data from them. Our primary outcome was overall survival (time to death from any cause). Secondary outcomes were disease-free survival (time to disease recurrence or death from any cause) and locoregional control (response to primary treatment). We contacted trial authors for additional information or clarification when necessary.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 100 studies with 18,813 participants. None of the included trials were at low risk of bias. For induction chemotherapy, we reported the results for contemporary regimens that will be of interest to clinicians and people being treated for oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers. Overall, there is insufficient evidence to clearly demonstrate a survival benefit from induction chemotherapy with platinum plus 5-fluorouracil prior to radiotherapy (hazard ratio (HR) for death 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 1.04, P = 0.11; 7427 participants, 5 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), prior to surgery (HR for death 1.06, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.60, P = 0.77; 198 participants, 1 study; low-certainty evidence) or prior to concurrent chemoradiation (CRT) with cisplatin (HR for death 0.71, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.35, P = 0.30; 389 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). There is insufficient evidence to support the use of an induction chemotherapy regimen with cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil plus docetaxel prior to CRT with cisplatin (HR for death 1.08, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.44, P = 0.63; 760 participants, 3 studies; low-certainty evidence). There is insufficient evidence to support the use of adjuvant chemotherapy over observation only following surgery (HR for death 0.95, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.22, P = 0.67; 353 participants, 5 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Among studies that compared post-surgical adjuvant CRT, as compared to post-surgical RT, adjuvant CRT showed a survival benefit (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.98, P = 0.03; 1097 participants, 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). Primary treatment with CRT, as compared to radiotherapy alone, was associated with a reduction in the risk of death (HR for death 0.74, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.83, P < 0.00001; 2852 participants, 24 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The results of this review demonstrate that chemotherapy in the curative-intent treatment of oral cavity and oropharyngeal cancers only seems to be of benefit when used in specific circumstances together with locoregional treatment. The evidence does not show a clear survival benefit from the use of induction chemotherapy prior to radiotherapy, surgery or CRT. Adjuvant CRT reduces the risk of death by 16%, as compared to radiotherapy alone. Concurrent chemoradiation as compared to radiation alone is associated with a greater than 20% improvement in overall survival; however, additional research is required to inform how the specific chemotherapy regimen may influence this benefit.
Topics: Chemoradiotherapy, Adjuvant; Humans; Mouth Neoplasms; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Oropharyngeal Neoplasms
PubMed: 34929047
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006386.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2018Dysphagia (swallowing problems), which is common after stroke, is associated with increased risk of death or dependency, occurrence of pneumonia, poor quality of life,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Dysphagia (swallowing problems), which is common after stroke, is associated with increased risk of death or dependency, occurrence of pneumonia, poor quality of life, and longer hospital stay. Treatments provided to improve dysphagia are aimed at accelerating recovery of swallowing function and reducing these risks. This is an update of the review first published in 1999 and updated in 2012.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of swallowing therapy on death or dependency among stroke survivors with dysphagia within six months of stroke onset.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (26 June 2018), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 6) in the Cochrane Library (searched 26 June 2018), MEDLINE (26 June 2018), Embase (26 June 2018), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (26 June 2018), Web of Science Core Collection (26 June 2018), SpeechBITE (28 June 2016), ClinicalTrials.Gov (26 June 2018), and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (26 June 2018). We also searched Google Scholar (7 June 2018) and the reference lists of relevant trials and review articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We sought to include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for people with dysphagia and recent stroke (within six months).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of evidence, and resolved disagreements through discussion with the third review author (PB). We used random-effects models to calculate odds ratios (ORs), mean differences (MDs), and standardised mean differences (SMDs), and provided 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each.The primary outcome was functional outcome, defined as death or dependency (or death or disability), at the end of the trial. Secondary outcomes were case fatality at the end of the trial, length of inpatient stay, proportion of participants with dysphagia at the end of the trial, swallowing ability, penetration aspiration score, or pneumonia, pharyngeal transit time, institutionalisation, and nutrition.
MAIN RESULTS
We added 27 new studies (1777 participants) to this update to include a total of 41 trials (2660 participants).We assessed the efficacy of swallowing therapy overall and in subgroups by type of intervention: acupuncture (11 studies), behavioural interventions (nine studies), drug therapy (three studies), neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES; six studies), pharyngeal electrical stimulation (PES; four studies), physical stimulation (three studies), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS; two studies), and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS; nine studies).Swallowing therapy had no effect on the primary outcome (death or dependency/disability at the end of the trial) based on data from one trial (two data sets) (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.75; 306 participants; 2 studies; I² = 0%; P = 0.86; moderate-quality evidence). Swallowing therapy had no effect on case fatality at the end of the trial (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.52; 766 participants; 14 studies; I² = 6%; P = 0.99; moderate-quality evidence). Swallowing therapy probably reduced length of inpatient stay (MD -2.9, 95% CI -5.65 to -0.15; 577 participants; 8 studies; I² = 11%; P = 0.04; moderate-quality evidence). Researchers found no evidence of a subgroup effect based on testing for subgroup differences (P = 0.54). Swallowing therapy may have reduced the proportion of participants with dysphagia at the end of the trial (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.55; 1487 participants; 23 studies; I² = 0%; P = 0.00001; low-quality evidence). Trial results show no evidence of a subgroup effect based on testing for subgroup differences (P = 0.91). Swallowing therapy may improve swallowing ability (SMD -0.66, 95% CI -1.01 to -0.32; 1173 participants; 26 studies; I² = 86%; P = 0.0002; very low-quality evidence). We found no evidence of a subgroup effect based on testing for subgroup differences (P = 0.09). We noted moderate to substantial heterogeneity between trials for these interventions. Swallowing therapy did not reduce the penetration aspiration score (i.e. it did not reduce radiological aspiration) (SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.00; 303 participants; 11 studies; I² = 46%; P = 0.05; low-quality evidence). Swallowing therapy may reduce the incidence of chest infection or pneumonia (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.78; 618 participants; 9 studies; I² = 59%; P = 0.009; very low-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Moderate- and low-quality evidence suggests that swallowing therapy did not have a significant effect on the outcomes of death or dependency/disability, case fatality at the end of the trial, or penetration aspiration score. However, swallowing therapy may have reduced length of hospital stay, dysphagia, and chest infections, and may have improved swallowing ability. However, these results are based on evidence of variable quality, involving a variety of interventions. Further high-quality trials are needed to test whether specific interventions are effective.
Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Acute Disease; Deglutition; Deglutition Disorders; Electric Stimulation Therapy; Gastrostomy; Humans; Intubation, Gastrointestinal; Length of Stay; Lisinopril; Metoclopramide; Nifedipine; Physical Stimulation; Pneumonia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stroke; Stroke Rehabilitation; Time Factors; Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
PubMed: 30376602
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000323.pub3