-
Journal of the Neurological Sciences Nov 2021Dysphagia is common in Parkinson's disease (PD). The effects of antiparkinsonian drugs on dysphagia are controversial. Several treatments for dysphagia are available but... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Dysphagia is common in Parkinson's disease (PD). The effects of antiparkinsonian drugs on dysphagia are controversial. Several treatments for dysphagia are available but there is no consensus on their efficacy in PD.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a systematic review of the literature and to define consensus statements on the treatment of dysphagia in PD and related nutritional management.
METHODS
A multinational group of experts in the field of neurogenic dysphagia and/or Parkinson's disease conducted a systematic evaluation of the literature and reported the results according to PRISMA guidelines. The evidence from the retrieved studies was analyzed and discussed in a consensus conference organized in Pavia, Italy, and the consensus statements were drafted. The final version of statements was subsequently achieved by e-mail consensus.
RESULTS
The literature review retrieved 64 papers on treatment and nutrition of patients with PD and dysphagia, mainly of Class IV quality. Based on the literature and expert opinion in cases where the evidence was limited or lacking, 26 statements were developed.
CONCLUSIONS
The statements developed by the Consensus panel provide a guidance for a multi-disciplinary treatment of dysphagia in patients with PD, involving neurologists, otorhinolaryngologists, gastroenterologists, phoniatricians, speech-language pathologists, dieticians, and clinical nutritionists.
Topics: Consensus; Deglutition Disorders; Humans; Italy; Parkinson Disease
PubMed: 34624796
DOI: 10.1016/j.jns.2021.120008 -
Dysphagia Feb 2023Oropharyngeal dysphagia is common post-stroke and can have serious consequences for patients. Understanding dysphagia recovery is critically important to inform... (Review)
Review
Oropharyngeal dysphagia is common post-stroke and can have serious consequences for patients. Understanding dysphagia recovery is critically important to inform prognostication and support patients and professionals with care planning. This systematic review was undertaken to identify clinical predictors of dysphagia recovery post-stroke. Online databases (EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, CINAHL, and Cochrane) were searched for studies reporting longitudinal swallowing recovery in adults post-stroke. Dysphagia recovery was defined as improvement measured on a clinical swallowing scale or upgrade in oral and/or enteral feeding status by the end of the follow-up period. The search strategy returned 6598 studies from which 87 studies went through full-text screening, and 19 studies were included that met the eligibility criteria. Age, airway compromise identified on instrumental assessment, dysphagia severity, bilateral lesions, and stroke severity were identified as predictors of persistent dysphagia and negative recovery in multiple logistic regression analysis. The available literature was predominated by retrospective data, and comparison of outcomes was limited by methodological differences across the studies in terms of the choice of assessment, measure of recovery, and period of follow-up. Future prospective research is warranted with increased representation of haemorrhagic strokes and uniform use of standardized scales of swallowing function.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Deglutition Disorders; Retrospective Studies; Stroke; Deglutition; Enteral Nutrition
PubMed: 35445366
DOI: 10.1007/s00455-022-10443-3 -
Australian Critical Care : Official... Jan 2021Post-extubation dysphagia has been associated with adverse health outcomes. To assist service planning and process development for early identification, an understanding... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Post-extubation dysphagia has been associated with adverse health outcomes. To assist service planning and process development for early identification, an understanding of the number of patients affected is required. However, significant variation exists in the reported incidence which ranges from 3% to 62%.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this study was to (i) conduct a meta-analysis on the incidence of dysphagia after endotracheal intubation in adult critically ill patients and (ii) describe the extent of heterogeneity within peer-reviewed articles and grey literature on the incidence of dysphagia after endotracheal intubation.
DATA SOURCES
Databases CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, SpeechBITE, and Google Scholar were systematically searched for studies published before October 2019.
REVIEW METHODS
Data extraction occurred in a double-blind manner for studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Risk of bias was determined using critical appraisal tools relevant to the individual study design. The overall quality of the synthesised results was described using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Raw data were transformed using Freeman-Tukey arcsine square root methodology. A random-effects model was utilised owing to heterogeneity between studies.
RESULTS
Of 3564 identified studies, 38 met the criteria for inclusion in the final review. A total of 5798 patient events were analysed, with 1957 dysphagic episodes identified. The combined weighted incidence of post-extubation dysphagia was 41% (95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.50). Of the patients with dysphagia, 36% aspirated silently (n = 155, 95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.50). Subgroup meta-regression analysis was unable to explain the heterogeneity across studies when accounting for the method of participant recruitment, method of dysphagia assessment, median duration of intubation, timing of dysphagia assessment, or patient population.
CONCLUSION
Dysphagia after endotracheal intubation is common and occurs in 41% of critically ill adults. Given the prevalence of dysphagia and high rates of silent aspiration in this population, further prospective research should focus on systematic and sensitive early identification methods.
Topics: Adult; Airway Extubation; Critical Illness; Deglutition Disorders; Humans; Incidence; Intubation, Intratracheal; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32739246
DOI: 10.1016/j.aucc.2020.05.008 -
European Geriatric Medicine Oct 2022Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is highly common across the world. It is reported that over 90% of CAP in older adults may be due to aspiration. However, the... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is highly common across the world. It is reported that over 90% of CAP in older adults may be due to aspiration. However, the diagnostic criteria for aspiration pneumonia (AP) have not been widely agreed. Is there a consensus on how to diagnose AP? What are the clinical features of patients being diagnosed with AP? We conducted a systematic review to answer these questions.
METHODS
We performed a literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL, and Cochrane to review the steps taken toward diagnosing AP. Search terms for "aspiration pneumonia" and "aged" were used. Inclusion criteria were: original research, community-acquired AP, age ≥ 75 years old, acute hospital admission.
RESULTS
A total of 10,716 reports were found. Following the removal of duplicates, 7601 were screened, 95 underwent full-text review, and 9 reports were included in the final analysis. Pneumonia was diagnosed using a combination of symptoms, inflammatory markers, and chest imaging findings in most studies. AP was defined as pneumonia with some relation to aspiration or dysphagia. Aspiration was inferred if there was witnessed or prior presumed aspiration, episodes of coughing on food or liquids, relevant underlying conditions, abnormalities on videofluoroscopy or water swallow test, and gravity-dependent distribution of shadows on chest imaging. Patients with AP were older, more frailer, and had more comorbidities than in non-AP.
CONCLUSION
There is a broad consensus on the clinical criteria to diagnose AP. It is a presumptive diagnosis with regards to patients' general frailty rather than in relation to swallowing function itself.
Topics: Aged; Community-Acquired Infections; Deglutition; Humans; Pneumonia; Pneumonia, Aspiration; Water
PubMed: 36008745
DOI: 10.1007/s41999-022-00689-3 -
Journal of Oral Rehabilitation Aug 2021Chin tuck against resistance (CTAR) exercise has been recently reported to be a new therapeutic exercise method that can help improve swallowing function in patients... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Chin tuck against resistance (CTAR) exercise has been recently reported to be a new therapeutic exercise method that can help improve swallowing function in patients with dysphagia. However, due to the differences in exercise protocols, methods and the tools used across studies of CTAR exercise, an overall systematic review of these studies is necessary.
OBJECTIVE
The present study investigated the exercise protocols, methods and tools used in various studies of CTAR exercise and summarised their findings.
METHODS
We searched for studies related to CTAR exercise using electronic databases and selected nine articles for review. The articles were categorised on the basis of four criteria: study design and quality, training protocol, outcome measures and clinical effect.
RESULTS
Four articles reported that CTAR exercise not only helped activate the suprahyoid muscle in healthy adults, but also activated the sternocleidomastoid muscle less than Shaker exercise. In addition, five articles reported that CTAR exercise was effective in improving swallowing function and oral diet stage in the pharyngeal phase, including reduction of airway aspiration in patients with dysphagia after stroke.
CONCLUSIONS
CTAR exercise more selectively activates the suprahyoid muscle and is an effective therapeutic exercise for improving swallowing function in patients with dysphagia. Because it is less strenuous than Shaker exercise, it requires less physical burden and effort, allowing greater compliance.
Topics: Adult; Chin; Deglutition; Deglutition Disorders; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Resistance Training
PubMed: 33973284
DOI: 10.1111/joor.13181 -
Nutrients Apr 2022Increasing bodies of epidemiological evidence indicate potential associations between dysphagia and the risk of frailty in older adults. We hypothesized that older... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Increasing bodies of epidemiological evidence indicate potential associations between dysphagia and the risk of frailty in older adults. We hypothesized that older adults with symptoms of dysphagia might have a higher prevalence of frailty or prefrailty than those without dysphagia.
METHODS
We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for relevant studies published through 20 April 2022. Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies that examined the associations between dysphagia and the existence of frailty or prefrailty in community-dwelling, facility-dwelling, or hospitalized adults aged 50 years or older were synthesized. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate study quality.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis comprised 12 cohorts, including 5,503,543 non-frailty participants and 735,303 cases of frailty or prefrailty. Random-effect meta-analysis demonstrated a significant association between dysphagia and the risk of frailty and prefrailty (OR, 3.24; 95% CI, 2.51-4.20). In addition, we observed consistent results across the subgroups and heterogeneity assessments.
CONCLUSIONS
We propose including dysphagia assessment as a critical factor in the cumulative deficit model for identifying frailty in older adults. Understanding dysphagia and the potential role of nutritional supplements in older adults may lead to improved strategies for preventing, delaying, or mitigating frailty.
Topics: Aged; Cross-Sectional Studies; Deglutition Disorders; Frail Elderly; Frailty; Humans; Independent Living
PubMed: 35565784
DOI: 10.3390/nu14091812 -
Neurology Feb 2021Introduction and validation of a phenotypic classification of neurogenic dysphagia based on flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES).
OBJECTIVE
Introduction and validation of a phenotypic classification of neurogenic dysphagia based on flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES).
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted, searching MEDLINE from inception to May 2020 for FEES findings in neurologic diseases of interest. Based on a retrospective analysis of FEES videos in neurologic diseases and considering the results from the review, a classification of neurogenic dysphagia was developed distinguishing different phenotypes. The classification was validated using 1,012 randomly selected FEES videos of patients with various neurologic disorders. Chi-square tests were used to compare the distribution of dysphagia phenotypes between the underlying neurologic disorders.
RESULTS
A total of 159 articles were identified, of which 59 were included in the qualitative synthesis. Seven dysphagia phenotypes were identified: (1) "premature bolus spillage" and (2) "delayed swallowing reflex" occurred mainly in stroke, (3) "predominance of residue in the valleculae" was most common in Parkinson disease, (4) "predominance of residue in the piriform sinus" occurred only in myositis, motoneuron disease, and brainstem stroke, (5) "pharyngolaryngeal movement disorder" was found in atypical Parkinsonian syndromes and stroke, (6) "fatigable swallowing weakness" was common in myasthenia gravis, and (7) "complex disorder" with a heterogeneous dysphagia pattern was the leading mechanism in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. The interrater reliability showed a strong agreement (kappa = 0.84).
CONCLUSION
Neurogenic dysphagia is not a symptom, but a multietiologic syndrome with different phenotypic patterns depending on the underlying disease. Dysphagia phenotypes can facilitate differential diagnosis in patients with dysphagia of unclear etiology.
Topics: Deglutition Disorders; Humans; Nervous System Diseases
PubMed: 33318164
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000011350 -
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 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine May 2022This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of dysphagia in older adults, subgrouping by recruitment settings and varying dysphagia... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of dysphagia in older adults, subgrouping by recruitment settings and varying dysphagia assessment methods.
METHODS
Five major databases were systematically searched through January 2022. A random-effects model for meta-analysis was conducted to obtain the pooled prevalence.
RESULTS
Prevalence of dysphagia in the community-dwelling elderly screened by water swallow test was 12.14% (95% CI: 6.48% to 19.25%, I = 0%), which was significantly lower than the combined prevalence of 30.52% (95% CI: 21.75% to 40.07%, I = 68%) assessed by Standardized Swallowing Assessment (SSA) and volume-viscosity swallow test (V-VST). The dysphagia prevalence among elderly nursing home residents evaluated by SSA was 58.69% (95% CI: 47.71% to 69.25%, I = 0%) and by the Gugging Swallowing Screen test (GUSS) test was 53.60% (95% CI: 41.20% to 65.79%, I = 0%). The prevalence of dysphagia in hospitalized older adults screened by the 10-item Eating Assessment Tool was 24.10% (95% CI: 16.64% to 32.44%, I = 0%), which was significantly lower than those assessed by V-VST or GUSS tests of 47.18% (95% CI: 38.30% to 56.14%, I = 0%).
CONCLUSIONS
Dysphagia is prevalent in the elderly, affecting approximately one in three community-dwelling elderly, almost half of the geriatric patients, and even more than half of elderly nursing home residents. The use of non-validated screening tools to report dysphagia underestimates its actual prevalence.
PubMed: 35566731
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11092605 -
Nutrients Jan 2020Probiotic is little known for its benefits on upper gastrointestinal health. The objective of this systematic review was to examine the efficacy of probiotics in...
Probiotic is little known for its benefits on upper gastrointestinal health. The objective of this systematic review was to examine the efficacy of probiotics in alleviating the frequency and severity of symptoms in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in the general adult population. The PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched for prospective studies on GERD, heartburn, regurgitation, and dyspepsia, without any limitation on sample size. The Jadad scale was used to evaluate the quality of randomized controlled trials. In total, 13 prospective studies that were published in 12 articles were included in the analysis and scored per the Jadad scale as high- (five studies), medium- (two), and low- (six) quality. One article reported on two probiotic groups; thus, 14 comparisons were included in the selected studies, of which 11 (79%) reported positive benefits of probiotics on symptoms of GERD. Five out of 11 positive outcomes (45%) noted benefits on reflux symptoms: three noted reduced regurgitation; improvements in reflux or heartburn were seen in one study; five (45%) saw improvements in dyspepsia symptoms; and nine (81%) saw improvements in other upper gastrointestinal symptoms, such as nausea (three studies), abdominal pain (five), and gas-related symptoms (four), such as belching, gurgling, and burping. In conclusion, probiotic use can be beneficial for GERD symptoms, such as regurgitation and heartburn. However, proper placebo-controlled, randomized, and double-blinded clinical trials with a sufficient number of participants are warranted to confirm its efficacy in alleviating these symptoms. Further, interventions with longer durations and an intermediate analysis of endpoints should be considered to determine the proper therapeutic window.
Topics: Gastroesophageal Reflux; Humans; Probiotics
PubMed: 31906573
DOI: 10.3390/nu12010132