The semisolid bolus swallow test for clinical diagnosis of oropharyngeal dysphagia: A prospective randomised study

20Citations
Citations of this article
39Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Contrary to clinical experience, clinical swallow tests are predominantly performed using water (water swallow tests, WST). In this study, we examine whether swallow tests performed using a bolus of semisolid food (bolus swallow test, BST) offer benefits. In a prospective, randomised, blind study, the results of a standardised saliva swallow test (SST), WST, BST, combinations of these tests and an endoscopic swallow test (FEES) in patients with oropharyngeal swallowing disorders of neurological (NEU) and non-neurological (NNEU) origin were compared. Sensitivity, specificity, test accuracy and inter-rater reliability were analysed. 62 patients (mean age = 64.68; range = 22-84) were included in the study (NEU = 40; NNEU = 22). A sensitivity of 70.7% (NEU = 70.3%, NNEU = 71.4%) and specificity of 82.5% (NEU = 92.3%; NNEU = 100%) were determined for the WST. The BST + SST was found to have a sensitivity of 89.6% (NEU = 66.7%; NNEU = 90.9%) and a specificity of 72.7% (NEU = 87.5%; NNEU = 90.9%). Analysis of test accuracy showed a statistically significant correlation between FEES and BST + SST. Only BST + SST exhibited statistically significant inter-rater reliability. BST in combination with SST was the sensitive clinical instrument for detecting aspiration both over the patient population as a whole and over the two sub-populations. Inter-rater reliability was found to be statistically significant. The results presented here demonstrate the benefit of semisolid food in investigating clinical dysphagia. © 2011 The Author(s).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Schultheiss, C., Nusser-Müller-Busch, R., & Seidl, R. O. (2011). The semisolid bolus swallow test for clinical diagnosis of oropharyngeal dysphagia: A prospective randomised study. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, 268(12), 1837–1844. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-011-1628-5

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