The relationship between upper esophageal sphincter pressure and psychological status in patients with globus sensation

3Citations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: To explore the correlation between changes in esophageal pressure and psychological status in patients with globus sensation. Methods: A total of 40 patients with globus sensation who attended Wenzhou People’s Hospital between August 2020 and February 2021 were divided into two groups based on the results of esophageal manometry: a high-pressure group and a non-high-pressure group. The duration of disease, clinical symptom score, and self-rating anxiety scale (SAS) were compared between the two groups to determine the relationship between changes in esopha-geal pressure and psychological status. Results: All the patients before treatment were divided into a high-pressure group (n = 14) and a non-high-pressure group (n = 26) according to whether the resting pressure of the upper esophageal sphincter (UES) was greater than 104 mmHg. The differences between the high-pressure group and non-high-pressure group in duration of disease, clinical symptom score, and SAS were statistically significant (all P < 0.05). Anxiety was present in 12 patients in the high-pressure group and two patients in the non-high-pressure group. The difference between the the high-pressure group and non-high-pressure group in the incidence of anxiety was statistically significant (χ2 = 21.04 and P < 0.001). Pearson correlation analysis of the association between esophageal pressure and anxiety resulted in R = 0.74 and P < 0.001. Conclusion: Patients with globus sensation who develop anxiety were more likely to have high pressure in the upper esophageal sphincter.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lan, Q. L., Lin, X. X., Wang, Y., Xu, B. B., Shu, K. Y., & Zhang, X. J. (2021). The relationship between upper esophageal sphincter pressure and psychological status in patients with globus sensation. International Journal of General Medicine, 14, 8805–8810. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJGM.S337165

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free