Effects of oral intake of water in patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Dysphagia is associated with numerous medical conditions and the major intervention to avoid aspiration in people with dysphagia involves modifying the diet to thickened fluids. This is associated with issues related to patient quality of life and in many cases non-compliance leading to dehydration. Given these concerns and in the absence of conclusive scientific evidence, we designed a study, to further investigate the effects of oral intake of water in people with dysphagia.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We monitored lung related complications, hydration levels and assessed quality of life in two groups of people with dysphagia. The control group was allowed only thickened fluids and patients in the intervention group were allowed access to water for a period of five days.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Our findings indicate a significantly increased risk in the development lung complications in patients given access to water (6/42; 14.3%) compared to the control group (0/34; no cases). We have further defined patients at highest risk, namely those with degenerative neurologic dysfunction who are immobile or have low mobility. Our results indicate increased total fluid intake in the patients allowed access to water, and the quality of life surveys, albeit from a limited number of patients (24% of patients), suggest the dissatisfaction of patients to diets composed of only thickened fluids.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>On the basis of these findings we recommend that acute patients, patients with severe neurological dysfunction and immobility should be strongly encouraged to adhere to a thickened fluid or modified solid consistency diet. We recommend that subacute patients with relatively good mobility should have choice after being well-informed of the relative risk.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR): <a href="http://www.anzctr.org.au/ACTRN12608000107325.aspx">ACTRN12608000107325</a></p

Double Blind Study Investigating the Effect of Different Voice Prostheses on Ease of Swallowing and Residue Post Laryngectomy.

Voice prostheses have been examined for their effect on voice production but there is little datum on their effect on swallow function. This study investigated the difference between six commonly available voice prostheses in terms of swallowing. Laryngectomy patients had up to six voice prostheses placed in a random order over two visits. Swallowing was evaluated for each prosthesis using FEES (Fibreoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing). After each prosthesis trial, patients self-evaluated their experience of swallowing. Three independent experts indicated which prosthesis they considered best for swallowing for each patient and judged residue on the voice prosthesis and in the upper esophagus. Raters were blinded to participant details, voice prosthesis type and scores of other raters. On patient self-evaluation, scores were equally distributed across all prostheses for swallowing. Experts most frequently chose the Blom Singer Low pressure and Blom Singer Classic Indwelling voice prostheses as best for swallowing but consensus was poor for most patients. Experts found that the Blom Singer Classic Indwelling and the Provox Vega had least residue on the voice prosthesis on thin liquid (p ≤ 0.001) and soft (p = 0.001), respectively. Experts also found that the Blom Singer Low Pressure had least residue in the upper esophagus on soft consistency (p ≤ 0.001). While self-evaluation by patients did not identify a consistently preferred prosthesis for swallow, many patients expressed personal preferences, suggesting benefits to involving patients in the choice of prosthesis. Some voice prostheses may be associated with lower levels of residue on the prosthesis and upper esophagus with certain consistencies