Borders James C, Steele Catriona M
Laboratory for the Study of Upper Airway Dysfunction, Department of Biobehavioral Sciences, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, United States.
Swallowing Rehabilitation Research Laboratory, KITE Research Institute-University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Front Rehabil Sci. 2024 Feb 23;5:1337971. doi: 10.3389/fresc.2024.1337971. eCollection 2024.
Thickened liquids are commonly recommended to reduce the risk of penetration-aspiration. However, questions persist regarding the impact of bolus consistency on swallowing safety. The common practice of summarizing Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS) scores based on worst scores is a bias in prior analyses. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of liquid consistency on PAS scores using a Bayesian multilevel ordinal regression model approach, considering all scores across repeated bolus trials. A second aim was to determine whether PAS scores differed across thickener type within consistency.
We analyzed two prior datasets (D1; D2). D1 involved 678 adults with suspected dysphagia (289 female; mean age 69 years, range 20-100). D2 involved 177 adults (94 female; mean age 54 years, range 21-85), of whom 106 were nominally healthy and 71 had suspected dysphagia. All participants underwent videofluoroscopy involving ≥3 boluses of 20% w/v thin liquid barium and of xanthan-gum thickened barium in mildly, moderately and extremely thick consistencies. D2 participants also swallowed trials of slightly thick liquid barium, and starch-thickened stimuli for each thickened consistency. Duplicate blinded rating yielded PAS scores per bolus, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. PAS ratings for a total of 8,185 and 3,407 boluses were available from D1 and D2, respectively. Bayesian models examined PAS patterns across consistencies. We defined meaningful differences as non-overlapping 95% credible intervals (CIs).
Across D1 and D2, penetration occurred on 10.87% of trials compared to sensate (0.68%) and silent aspiration (1.54%), with higher rates of penetration (13.47%) and aspiration (3.07%) on thin liquids. For D1, the probability of a PAS score > 2 was higher for thin liquids with weighted PAS scores of 1.57 (CI: 1.48, 1.66) versus mildly (1.26; CI: 1.2, 1.33), moderately (1.1; CI: 1.07, 1.13), and extremely thick liquids (1.04; CI: 1.02, 1.08). D2 results were similar. Weighted PAS scores did not meaningfully differ between thin and slightly thick liquids, or between starch and xanthan gum thickened liquids.
These results confirm that the probability of penetration-aspiration is greatest on thin liquids compared to thick liquids, with significant reductions in PAS severity emerging with mildly thick liquids.
稠厚液体通常被推荐用于降低渗透 - 误吸风险。然而,关于食团黏稠度对吞咽安全性的影响仍存在疑问。以往分析中基于最差分数总结渗透 - 误吸量表(PAS)分数的常见做法存在偏差。本研究的目的是使用贝叶斯多级有序回归模型方法,考虑重复食团试验中的所有分数,来检验液体黏稠度对PAS分数的影响。第二个目的是确定在相同黏稠度下,不同增稠剂类型的PAS分数是否存在差异。
我们分析了两个先前的数据集(D1;D2)。D1涉及678名疑似吞咽困难的成年人(289名女性;平均年龄69岁,范围20 - 100岁)。D2涉及177名成年人(94名女性;平均年龄54岁,范围21 - 85岁),其中106名名义上健康,71名疑似吞咽困难。所有参与者均接受了视频荧光吞咽造影检查,包括≥3次吞咽20% w/v稀钡剂以及轻度、中度和极重度增稠的黄原胶增稠钡剂。D2的参与者还吞咽了稍稠钡剂试验以及每种增稠程度的淀粉增稠刺激物。重复的双盲评分得出每个食团的PAS分数,差异通过共识解决。D1和D2分别有8185个和3407个食团的PAS评分可用。贝叶斯模型检查了不同黏稠度下的PAS模式。我们将有意义的差异定义为非重叠的95%可信区间(CI)。
在D1和D2中,与感觉性误吸(0.68%)和无声误吸(1.54%)相比,10.87%的试验发生了渗透,稀液体的渗透(13.47%)和误吸(3.07%)发生率更高。对于D1,PAS分数>2的概率在稀液体中更高,加权PAS分数为1.57(CI:1.48,1.66),而轻度增稠液体为(1.26;CI:1.2,1.33)、中度增稠液体为(1.1;CI:1.07,1.13)、极重度增稠液体为(1.04;CI:1.02,1.08)。D2的结果相似。稀液体和稍稠液体之间,以及淀粉增稠液体和黄原胶增稠液体之间的加权PAS分数没有显著差异。
这些结果证实,与稠厚液体相比,稀液体发生渗透 - 误吸的概率最大,轻度增稠液体可显著降低PAS严重程度。