Po-Cheng Chen1, Ching-Hui Chuang2,3, Chau-Peng Leong1, Su-Er Guo4,5, Yi-Jung Hsin6. 1. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital-Kaohsiung Medical Center, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 2. College of Nursing, Chang Gung University of Science and Technology, Chiayi Campus, Taiwan. chinhui@cgmh.org.tw. 3. Department of Nursing, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital-Kaohsiung Medical Center, Taiwan. chinhui@cgmh.org.tw. 4. Chronic Diseases and Health Promotion Research Center, Chiayi, Taiwan. 5. College of Nursing and Graduate Institute of Nursing, Chang Gung University of Science and Technology, Chiayi, Taiwan. 6. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital-Kaohsiung Medical Center, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the water swallow test for screening aspirations in stroke patients. BACKGROUND: The water swallow test is a simple bedside screening tool for aspiration among stroke patients in nursing practice, but results from different studies have not been combined before. DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to provide a synthetic and critical appraisal of the included studies. DATA SOURCES: Electronic literature in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and other sources were searched systemically in this study. Databases and registers were searched from inception up to 30 April 2015. REVIEW METHODS: This systematic review was conducted using the recommendations from Cochrane Collaboration for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy. Bivariate random-effects models were used to estimate the diagnostic accuracy across those studies. The tool named Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) was used to evaluate the quality of the studies. RESULTS: There were 770 stroke patients in the 11 studies for the meta-analysis. The water swallow test had sensitivities between 64-79% and specificities between 61-81%. Meta-regression analysis indicated that increasing water volume resulted in higher sensitivity but lower specificity of the water swallow test. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review showed that the water swallow test was a useful screening tool for aspiration among stroke patients. The test accuracy was related to the water volume and a 3-oz water swallow test was recommended for aspiration screening in stroke patients.
AIM: The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the water swallow test for screening aspirations in strokepatients. BACKGROUND: The water swallow test is a simple bedside screening tool for aspiration among strokepatients in nursing practice, but results from different studies have not been combined before. DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to provide a synthetic and critical appraisal of the included studies. DATA SOURCES: Electronic literature in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and other sources were searched systemically in this study. Databases and registers were searched from inception up to 30 April 2015. REVIEW METHODS: This systematic review was conducted using the recommendations from Cochrane Collaboration for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy. Bivariate random-effects models were used to estimate the diagnostic accuracy across those studies. The tool named Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) was used to evaluate the quality of the studies. RESULTS: There were 770 strokepatients in the 11 studies for the meta-analysis. The water swallow test had sensitivities between 64-79% and specificities between 61-81%. Meta-regression analysis indicated that increasing water volume resulted in higher sensitivity but lower specificity of the water swallow test. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review showed that the water swallow test was a useful screening tool for aspiration among strokepatients. The test accuracy was related to the water volume and a 3-oz water swallow test was recommended for aspiration screening in strokepatients.
Authors: Laura W J Baijens; Margaret Walshe; Leena-Maija Aaltonen; Christoph Arens; Reinie Cordier; Patrick Cras; Lise Crevier-Buchman; Chris Curtis; Wojciech Golusinski; Roganie Govender; Jesper Grau Eriksen; Kevin Hansen; Kate Heathcote; Markus M Hess; Sefik Hosal; Jens Peter Klussmann; C René Leemans; Denise MacCarthy; Beatrice Manduchi; Jean-Paul Marie; Reza Nouraei; Claire Parkes; Christina Pflug; Walmari Pilz; Julie Regan; Nathalie Rommel; Antonio Schindler; Annemie M W J Schols; Renee Speyer; Giovanni Succo; Irene Wessel; Anna C H Willemsen; Taner Yilmaz; Pere Clavé Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2020-12-19 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Elizabeth Boaden; Jane Burnell; Lucy Hives; Paola Dey; Andrew Clegg; Mary W Lyons; C Elizabeth Lightbody; Margaret A Hurley; Hazel Roddam; Elizabeth McInnes; Anne Alexandrov; Caroline L Watkins Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2021-10-18