Carol A Smith Hammond1, Larry B Goldstein2, Ron D Horner3, Jun Ying3, Linda Gray4, Leslie Gonzalez-Rothi5, Donald C Bolser6. 1. Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Durham, NC. Electronic address: smith390@mc.duke.edu. 2. Center for Cerebrovascular Diseases, Duke University, Durham, NC. 3. Institute for the Study of Health, University of Cincinnati Academic Health Center, Cincinnati, OH. 4. Department of Radiology, Duke University, Durham, NC. 5. Brain Rehabilitation Research Center, Gainesville VAMC, Gainesville, FL. 6. Department of Physiological Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical signs often fail to identify stroke patients who are at increased risk of aspiration. We hypothesized that objective measure of voluntary cough would improve the accuracy of the clinical evaluation of swallow to predict those patients who are at risk. METHODS: A comprehensive diagnostic evaluation was completed for 96 consecutive stroke patients that included cognitive testing, a bedside clinical swallow examination, aerodynamic and sound pressure level measures of voluntary cough, and "gold standard" instrumental swallowing studies (ie, videofluoroscopic evaluation of swallow [VSE] or fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallow [FEES]). Stroke severity was assessed retrospectively using the Canadian neurologic scale. RESULTS: Based on the findings of VSE/FEES, 33 patients (34%) were at high risk of aspiration and (66%) were nonaspirators. Clinical signs (eg, absent swallow, difficulty handling secretions, or reflexive cough after water bolus) had an overall accuracy of 74% with a sensitivity of 58% and a specificity of 83% for the detection of aspiration. Three objective measures of voluntary cough (expulsive phase rise time, volume acceleration, and expulsive phase peak flow) were each associated with an aspiration risk category (areas under the curves were 0.93, 0.92, and 0.86, respectively). Expulsive phase rise time > 55 m/s, volume acceleration < 50 L/s/s, and expulsive phase peak flow < 2.9 L/s had sensitivities of 91%, 91%, and 82%, respectively; and specificities of 81%, 92%, and 83%, respectively for the identification of aspirators. CONCLUSION: Objective measures of voluntary cough can identify stroke patients who are at risk for aspiration and may be useful as an adjunct to the standard bedside clinical assessment.
BACKGROUND: Clinical signs often fail to identify strokepatients who are at increased risk of aspiration. We hypothesized that objective measure of voluntary cough would improve the accuracy of the clinical evaluation of swallow to predict those patients who are at risk. METHODS: A comprehensive diagnostic evaluation was completed for 96 consecutive strokepatients that included cognitive testing, a bedside clinical swallow examination, aerodynamic and sound pressure level measures of voluntary cough, and "gold standard" instrumental swallowing studies (ie, videofluoroscopic evaluation of swallow [VSE] or fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallow [FEES]). Stroke severity was assessed retrospectively using the Canadian neurologic scale. RESULTS: Based on the findings of VSE/FEES, 33 patients (34%) were at high risk of aspiration and (66%) were nonaspirators. Clinical signs (eg, absent swallow, difficulty handling secretions, or reflexive cough after water bolus) had an overall accuracy of 74% with a sensitivity of 58% and a specificity of 83% for the detection of aspiration. Three objective measures of voluntary cough (expulsive phase rise time, volume acceleration, and expulsive phase peak flow) were each associated with an aspiration risk category (areas under the curves were 0.93, 0.92, and 0.86, respectively). Expulsive phase rise time > 55 m/s, volume acceleration < 50 L/s/s, and expulsive phase peak flow < 2.9 L/s had sensitivities of 91%, 91%, and 82%, respectively; and specificities of 81%, 92%, and 83%, respectively for the identification of aspirators. CONCLUSION: Objective measures of voluntary cough can identify strokepatients who are at risk for aspiration and may be useful as an adjunct to the standard bedside clinical assessment.
Authors: M J Alberts; G Hademenos; R E Latchaw; A Jagoda; J R Marler; M R Mayberg; R D Starke; H W Todd; K M Viste; M Girgus; T Shephard; M Emr; P Shwayder; M D Walker Journal: JAMA Date: 2000-06-21 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Teresa Pitts; Melanie J Rose; Ashley N Mortensen; Ivan Poliacek; Christine M Sapienza; Bruce G Lindsey; Kendall F Morris; Paul W Davenport; Donald C Bolser Journal: Respir Physiol Neurobiol Date: 2013-08-30 Impact factor: 1.931
Authors: Luis F Giraldo-Cadavid; Javier Burguete; Felipe Rueda; Ana M Galvis; Natalia Castaneda; Luis M Agudelo-Otalora; William D Moscoso; Nelson Paez; Secundino Fernandez Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2017-03-24 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Michelle S Troche; Beate Schumann; Alexandra E Brandimore; Michael S Okun; Karen W Hegland Journal: Dysphagia Date: 2016-07-26 Impact factor: 3.438