Literature DB >> 31209638

Transcutaneous Electrical Stimulation on the Submental Area: The Relations of Biopsychological Factors with Maximum Amplitude Tolerance and Perceived Discomfort Level.

Ali Barikroo1, Karen Hegland2, Giselle Carnaby3, Donald Bolser4, Todd Manini5, Michael Crary3.   

Abstract

Transcutaneous electrical stimulation (TES) is a frequently used adjunctive modality in dysphagia rehabilitation. Stimulating deeper swallowing muscles requires higher TES amplitude. However, TES amplitude is limited by maximum amplitude tolerance (MAT). Previous studies have reported high interindividual variability regarding MAT and perceived discomfort. This variability might be one of the potential reasons of conflicting outcomes in TES-based swallowing studies. MAT and perceived discomfort are influenced by a variety of biopsychological factors. The influence of these factors related to swallow applications is poorly understood. This study explored the relation of biopsychological factors with MAT and perceived discomfort related to TES in the submental area. A convenience sample of thirty community-dwelling older adults between 60 and 70 years of age provided data for this study. Gender, submental adipose tissue thickness, perceptual pain sensitivity, and pain-coping strategies were evaluated for each subject. Subsequently, MAT and perceived discomfort level were determined using TES on the submental area. Relation of different biopsychological variables with MAT and discomfort level was examined using Pearson and Spearman correlation, and Mann-Whitney U test. Results indicated that neither gender nor adipose thickness was related to MAT and perceived discomfort. Among studied pain-coping strategies, catastrophizing was significantly related to MAT(r = - 0.552, p < .002). Distraction was significantly related to perceived discomfort level (r = - 0.561, p < 0.002). Given the negative impact of pain catastrophizing on MAT and the positive impact of distraction on perceiving discomfort, these coping strategies should be considered as amplitude-limiting and discomfort-moderating factors in TES-based dysphagia rehabilitation.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biopsychological factors; Deglutition; Deglutition disorders; Discomfort; Maximum amplitude tolerance

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31209638     DOI: 10.1007/s00455-019-10029-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dysphagia        ISSN: 0179-051X            Impact factor:   3.438


  39 in total

1.  Patient tolerance of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in the presence of orthopaedic implants.

Authors:  Barry J Broderick; Cian Kennedy; Paul P Breen; Stephen R Kearns; Gearóid ÓLaighin
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.242

2.  Prevalence of dysphagia among community-dwelling elderly individuals as estimated using a questionnaire for dysphagia screening.

Authors:  Kei Kawashima; Yutaka Motohashi; Ichiro Fujishima
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.438

Review 3.  The effects of surface neuromuscular electrical stimulation on post-stroke dysphagia: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yi-Wen Chen; Kwang-Hwa Chang; Hung-Chou Chen; Wen-Miin Liang; Ya-Hui Wang; Yen-Nung Lin
Journal:  Clin Rehabil       Date:  2015-02-19       Impact factor: 3.477

4.  Transcutaneous electrical stimulation on the anterior neck region: The impact of pulse duration and frequency on maximum amplitude tolerance and perceived discomfort.

Authors:  Ali Barikroo; Giselle Carnaby; Donald Bolser; Ronald Rozensky; Michael Crary
Journal:  J Oral Rehabil       Date:  2018-03-30       Impact factor: 3.837

5.  Assessment of chronic pain. I. Aspects of the reliability and validity of the visual analogue scale.

Authors:  Anna Maria Carlsson
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1983-05       Impact factor: 6.961

6.  Depression, pain, exposure to stressful life events, and long-term outcomes in temporomandibular disorder patients.

Authors:  S M Auerbach; D M Laskin; L M Frantsve; T Orr
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 1.895

Review 7.  The biopsychosocial approach to chronic pain: scientific advances and future directions.

Authors:  Robert J Gatchel; Yuan Bo Peng; Madelon L Peters; Perry N Fuchs; Dennis C Turk
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 17.737

8.  Neuromuscular electrical stimulation and volitional exercise for individuals with rheumatoid arthritis: a multiple-patient case report.

Authors:  Sara R Piva; Edward A Goodnite; Koichiro Azuma; Jason D Woollard; Bret H Goodpaster; Mary Chester Wasko; G Kelley Fitzgerald
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2007-06-06

9.  Distraction modulates connectivity of the cingulo-frontal cortex and the midbrain during pain--an fMRI analysis.

Authors:  Michael Valet; Till Sprenger; Henning Boecker; Frode Willoch; Ernst Rummeny; Bastian Conrad; Peter Erhard; Thomas R Tolle
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 6.961

Review 10.  A review of age differences in the neurophysiology of nociception and the perceptual experience of pain.

Authors:  Stephen J Gibson; Michael Farrell
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2004 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.442

View more
  4 in total

1.  Effects of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation (NMES) on salivary flow in healthy adults.

Authors:  Joji Koike; Shinji Nozue; Yoshiaki Ihara; Koji Takahashi
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2020-08-01

2.  Healthy Volunteers Immediately Adapt to Submental Stimulation During Swallowing.

Authors:  Mohammed F Safi; Sandra Martin; Lincoln Gray; Christy L Ludlow
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2021-09-30

3.  Effects of Varying Transcutaneous Electrical Stimulation Pulse Duration on Swallowing Kinematics in Healthy Adults.

Authors:  Ali Barikroo; Alexis L Clark
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2021-03-03       Impact factor: 3.438

4.  Submental transcutaneous electrical stimulation can impact the timing of laryngeal vestibule closure.

Authors:  Ali Barikroo; Mitchell T McLean
Journal:  J Oral Rehabil       Date:  2022-06-06       Impact factor: 3.558

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.