Suppr超能文献

健康老年人吞咽时发生误吸的影响因素。

Factors influencing aspiration during swallowing in healthy older adults.

机构信息

Department of Otolaryngology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27157, USA.

出版信息

Laryngoscope. 2010 Nov;120(11):2147-52. doi: 10.1002/lary.21116.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Although flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) is an established diagnostic tool, little data exist on the effects of varying liquid types on the swallowing outcomes in healthy older adults.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective.

METHODS

Seventy-six healthy older adult volunteers participated (i.e., 18, 28, and 30 volunteers in the 7th, 8th, and 9th decades of life, respectively). The effects of age, sex, liquid type (i.e., water, skim, 2% milk, or whole milk), delivery method (i.e., cup or straw), and volume (i.e., 5, 10, 15, or 20 mL) on Penetration Aspiration Scale (PAS) scores were assessed during FEES.

RESULTS

Penetration and silent aspiration were observed in 83% and 28% of the participants, respectively. This represented 19% and 3% of participants' 2,432 swallows, respectively. Liquid type (P = .0001), bolus volume (P = .02), and delivery method (P = .04) significantly affected PAS scores. PAS scores were significantly (P < .05) greater for milk versus water swallows, whole- versus skim-milk swallows, 10- and 20-mL versus 5-mL volumes, and straw versus cup delivery. The risk for aspiration increased by approximately two-, three-, and seven-fold with maximal increases in bolus volume, fat content of liquids, and age, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Occasional aspiration may be an underappreciated phenomenon during FEES in healthy older adults. In addition, milk yielded a higher likelihood of aspiration than water. Accordingly, different liquid types, bolus volumes, and delivery methods should be used to ensure an accurate assessment of aspiration status in healthy older adults.

摘要

目的/假设:尽管灵活的吞咽内镜评估(FEES)是一种既定的诊断工具,但关于不同液体类型对健康老年人吞咽结果的影响的数据很少。

研究设计

前瞻性。

方法

76 名健康的老年志愿者参与(即,分别有 18、28 和 30 名志愿者来自 7、8 和 9 个十年的生命阶段)。在 FEES 期间,评估年龄、性别、液体类型(即水、脱脂、2%牛奶或全脂牛奶)、输送方式(即杯子或吸管)和体积(即 5、10、15 或 20 毫升)对渗透误吸量表(PAS)评分的影响。

结果

在 83%的参与者中观察到渗透和无声误吸,分别占参与者 2,432 次吞咽的 19%和 3%。液体类型(P=.0001)、吞咽量(P=.02)和输送方式(P=.04)显著影响 PAS 评分。与水相比,牛奶的 PAS 评分显著更高(P<.05),全脂奶比脱脂奶,10 毫升和 20 毫升比 5 毫升的 PAS 评分更高,吸管比杯子的 PAS 评分更高。随着吞咽量、液体脂肪含量和年龄的最大增加,误吸的风险分别增加了大约两倍、三倍和七倍。

结论

在健康老年人的 FEES 中,偶尔的误吸可能是一个被低估的现象。此外,牛奶比水更容易引起误吸。因此,应该使用不同的液体类型、吞咽量和输送方式,以确保对健康老年人的误吸状况进行准确评估。

相似文献

7
Stability of aspiration status in healthy adults.健康成年人误吸状态的稳定性。
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2013 May;122(5):289-93. doi: 10.1177/000348941312200501.

引用本文的文献

6
Screening of dysphagia in geriatrics.老年人吞咽困难的筛查。
BMC Geriatr. 2022 Dec 19;22(1):981. doi: 10.1186/s12877-022-03685-1.

本文引用的文献

4
Effects of verbal cue on bolus flow during swallowing.言语提示对吞咽过程中食团流动的影响。
Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2007 May;16(2):140-7. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2007/018).
10
Tongue strength and endurance in different aged individuals.不同年龄段个体的舌肌力量和耐力
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1996 Sep;51(5):M247-50. doi: 10.1093/gerona/51a.5.m247.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验