Yeon Jae Han1, Jungjae Lee2, Dong Gyun Sohn1, Geun-Young Park1, Youngkook Kim3, Hae-Yeon Park2, Sang-A Jung1, Sun Im1. 1. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Bucheon St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul 14647, Korea. 2. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul 06591, Korea. 3. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Yeouido St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul 07345, Korea.
Abstract
Background and objectives: This study aimed to determine the cut-off values of the following three respiratory pressure meters; the voluntary peak cough flow (PCF), maximal expiratory pressure (MEP) and maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP); associated with post-stroke dysphagia and assess which of these parameters show good diagnostic properties associated with post-stroke dysphagia. Materials and Methods: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database. Records of patients with first-ever diagnosed dysphagia attributable to cerebrovascular disease, who had performed spirometry measurements for the PCF, MIP and MEP. Results: From a total of 237 stroke patients, 163 patients were diagnosed with dysphagia. Those with dysphagia had significantly lower PCF values than those without dysphagia (116.3 ± 75.3 vs. 219.4 ± 91.8 L/min, p < 0.001). In addition, the former group also had lower MIP (30.5 ± 24.7 vs. 41.6 ± 25.7 cmH2O, p = 0.0002) and MEP (41.0 ± 27.9 vs. 62.8 ± 32.3 cmH2O, p < 0.001) values than the latter group. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that the PCF cut-off value of 151 L/min (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] 0.81; sensitivity 72%; specificity 78.8%) was associated with post-stroke dysphagia. The optimum MEP and MIP cut-off were 38 cmH2O (AUC 0.70, sensitivity 58%; specificity 77.7%) and 20 cmH2O (AUC 0.65, sensitivity 49%; specificity 84%). PCF showed the highest AUC results. Results from the univariate analysis indicated that PCF values of ≤151 L/min increased risk of dysphagia by 9.51-fold (4.96-18.23). Multivariable analysis showed that after controlling of other clinical factor, the PCFs at this cut-off value still showed increased risk of by 4.19 (2.02-83.69) but this was not observed with the MIPs or MEPs. Conclusions: Our study has provided cut-off values that are associated with increased risk of dysphagia. Among the three parameters, PCF showed increased association with post-stroke dysphagia.
Background and objectives: This study aimed to determine the cut-off values of the following three respiratory pressure meters; the voluntary peak cough flow (PCF), maximal expiratory pressure (MEP) and maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP); associated with post-stroke dysphagia and assess which of these parameters show good diagnostic properties associated with post-stroke dysphagia. Materials and Methods: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database. Records of patients with first-ever diagnosed dysphagia attributable to cerebrovascular disease, who had performed spirometry measurements for the PCF, MIP and MEP. Results: From a total of 237 strokepatients, 163 patients were diagnosed with dysphagia. Those with dysphagia had significantly lower PCF values than those without dysphagia (116.3 ± 75.3 vs. 219.4 ± 91.8 L/min, p < 0.001). In addition, the former group also had lower MIP (30.5 ± 24.7 vs. 41.6 ± 25.7 cmH2O, p = 0.0002) and MEP (41.0 ± 27.9 vs. 62.8 ± 32.3 cmH2O, p < 0.001) values than the latter group. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that the PCF cut-off value of 151 L/min (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] 0.81; sensitivity 72%; specificity 78.8%) was associated with post-stroke dysphagia. The optimum MEP and MIP cut-off were 38 cmH2O (AUC 0.70, sensitivity 58%; specificity 77.7%) and 20 cmH2O (AUC 0.65, sensitivity 49%; specificity 84%). PCF showed the highest AUC results. Results from the univariate analysis indicated that PCF values of ≤151 L/min increased risk of dysphagia by 9.51-fold (4.96-18.23). Multivariable analysis showed that after controlling of other clinical factor, the PCFs at this cut-off value still showed increased risk of by 4.19 (2.02-83.69) but this was not observed with the MIPs or MEPs. Conclusions: Our study has provided cut-off values that are associated with increased risk of dysphagia. Among the three parameters, PCF showed increased association with post-stroke dysphagia.