What Type of Food Can Older Adults Masticate?: Evaluation of Mastication Performance Using Color-Changeable Chewing Gum

30Citations
Citations of this article
92Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This study determines if older adults can masticate regular foods via a simple test conducted using a color-changeable chewing gum. Seventy-nine consecutive inpatients of our clinic receiving rehabilitation and general medicine were assessed for eligibility. The inclusion criterion was >65 years. Thirty patients consented to participate. The main outcome variable was the food bolus texture at the swallowing threshold for five regular foods. The main explanatory variable was the a* value of the color-changeable chewing gum after 120 s of chewing (a* represents the degree of color between red and green, and a positive a* value indicates red). The mean age ± standard deviation of the participants was 81.6 ± 8.6 years, and 40% were men. Participants being able to prepare the food with suitable texture for swallowing was positively associated with the a* values in boiled rice, ginger-fried pork loin, boiled fish-paste, and rice cracker (Crude OR 1.18, 1.15, 1.17, and 1.50; P < 0.001, = 0.026, <0.001, and <0.001, respectively). The cut-off a* values had markedly high specificities (1.0) for boiled rice and boiled fish-paste and high sensitivities (0.86–0.94) for three foods, except boiled rice. We believe that mastication evaluation using the color-changeable chewing gum is not only useful but also extremely practical, even for older adults in a wide range of settings, including an individual’s home. This approach would lead to a reduction in unnecessary mechanically altered or pureed food for older adults who can eat pureed food and safely provide palatable food.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Wada, S., Kawate, N., & Mizuma, M. (2017). What Type of Food Can Older Adults Masticate?: Evaluation of Mastication Performance Using Color-Changeable Chewing Gum. Dysphagia, 32(5), 636–643. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-017-9807-1

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