| Literature DB >> 33456308 |
Yoshiko Hara1, Ayako Nakane2, Haruka Tohara2, Kazumasa Kubota1, Kazuharu Nakagawa2, Koji Hara2, Kohei Yamaguchi2, Kanako Yoshimi2, Shunsuke Minakuchi1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We aimed to determine the efficacy of interferential current transcutaneous electrical sensory stimulation (IFC-TESS) in patients with dementia who were being treated for dysphagia in nursing homes under normal living conditions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study recruited 54 nursing home residents (13 males, 41 females; mean age, 84.5 ± 10.7 years) with dysphagia and dementia. IFC-TESS was performed with Gentle Stim® (Careido Co. Ltd., Kanagawa, Japan) for 15 minutes. Two sessions per day were administered 5 days per week, for 3 weeks. The outcomes included the improvement of the patients' cough reflexes and nutritional states across the 3 weeks of intervention; the former was evaluated with the cough test based on the changes in cough latency time and cough frequency, while the latter was assessed based on changes in the functional oral intake scale (FOIS) score and oral calorie intake.Entities:
Keywords: FOIS; IFC-TESS; cough frequency; cough latency time; oral calorie intake
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33456308 PMCID: PMC7804050 DOI: 10.2147/CIA.S274968
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Interv Aging ISSN: 1176-9092 Impact factor: 4.458
Figure 1Participant flowchart.
Figure 2Positions of electrodes. The upper electrodes are placed directly below the mandibular angle, and the lower electrodes are placed at the level of the thyroid cartilage along the anterior edge of the sternocleidomastoid muscle. A 50-beat interferential wave is generated from two different alternating currents (2000 or 2500 Hz).
Baseline Characteristics of the Patients
| Characteristics | Total (n = 54) |
|---|---|
| Age (years) | 84.5±10.7 |
| Female, n (%) | 41 (75.9) |
| Male, n (%) | 13 (24.1) |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 20.5±3.0 |
| MNA | 19.7+3.9 |
| BI score | 36.2±29.0 |
| MMSE score | 11.4±9.1 |
| Comorbidities, n (%) | |
| Stroke | 21 (38.9) |
| Cognitive disorder | 15 (27.8) |
| Parkinson disease | 3 (5.6) |
| Head and neck disease | 5 (9.2) |
| Others | 10 (18.5) |
Note: Data are given as mean±SD or n (%).
Abbreviations: BI, Barthel index; BMI, body mass index; MMSE, mini-mental state examination; MNA, mini nutritional assessment; SD, standard deviation.
Outcome Comparisons of Cough Reflex and Nutritional Intake Before and After the 3-Week IFC-TESS
| Before (n = 54) | After 3 Weeks (n = 54) | p-value | Effect Size | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cough latency (s) | 15.8 (7.0–60.0) | 6.7 (3.6–30.7) | <0.001a | 0.469 |
| Cough frequency (n/min) | 5.0 (0.0–5.0) | 5.0 (5.0–5.0) | 0.001a | 0.507 |
| FOIS score | 5.0 (5.0–6.0) | 5.0 (5.0–6.0) | 0.020a | 0.156 |
| Nutritional oral intake (kcal/day) | 1300.0 (862.5–1420.0) | 1300.0 (1005.0–1462.5) | <0.001a | 0.235 |
Note: Data are given as median (IQR) for Wilcoxon signed-rank test. aStatistically significant.
Abbreviations: FOIS, functional oral intake scale; IFC-TESS, interferential current transcutaneous electrical sensory stimulation; IQR, interquartile range.
Comparison of Differences in Cough Latency, Cough Frequency, FOIS, and Nutritional Oral Intake Before and After the 3-Week IFC-TESS
| Dependent Variable | Independent Variable | B (95% CI) | β | p-value | VIF | Adjusted R2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cough latency | Age (years) | 0.137 (−0.542 to 0.816) | 0.062 | 0.687 | 1.143 | |
| Sex | 8.509 (−7.634 to 24.651) | 0.156 | 0.294 | 1.059 | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | −0.570 (−3.493 to 2.353) | −0.073 | 0.697 | 1.700 | −0.083 | |
| MNA | 0.409 (−2.281 to 3.098) | 0.067 | 0.761 | 2.383 | ||
| BI score | 0.064 (−0.315 to 0.442) | 0.078 | 0.737 | 2.628 | ||
| MMSE score | −0.094 (−1.214 to 1.026) | −0.036 | 0.866 | 2.252 | ||
| Cough frequency | Age (years) | 0.022 (−0.040 to 0.084) | 0.109 | 0.472 | 1.143 | |
| Sex | 0.730 (−0.739 to 2.198) | 0.145 | 0.323 | 1.059 | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | −0.167 (−0.433 to 0.099) | −0.232 | 0.212 | 1.700 | −0.046 | |
| MNA | 0.087 (−0.157 to 0.332) | 0.156 | 0.477 | 2.383 | ||
| BI score | −0.003 (−0.037 to 0.032) | −0.034 | 0.883 | 2.628 | ||
| MMSE score | 0.003 (−0.099 to 0.105) | 0.013 | 0.952 | 2.252 | ||
| FOIS | Age (years) | 0.003 (−0.008 to 0.014) | 0.088 | 0.557 | 1.143 | |
| Sex | 0.030 (−0.233 to 0.292) | 0.033 | 0.821 | 1.059 | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 0.030 (−0.018 to 0.077) | 0.228 | 0.217 | 1.700 | −0.038 | |
| MNA | −0.030 (−0.073 to 0.014) | −0.293 | 0.181 | 2.383 | ||
| BI score | 0.000 (−0.007 to 0.006) | −0.026 | 0.909 | 2.628 | ||
| MMSE score | 0.013 (0.006 to 0.031) | 0.292 | 0.171 | 2.252 | ||
| Nutritional oral intake | Age (years) | 1.980 (−1.357 to 5.316) | 0.182 | 0.239 | 1.143 | |
| Sex | 22.571 (−56.739 to 101.881) | 0.084 | 0.570 | 1.059 | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | −0.680 (−15.041 to 13.681) | −0.018 | 0.925 | 1.700 | −0.078 | |
| MNA | −3.412 (−16.627 to 9.802) | −0.114 | 0.606 | 2.383 | ||
| BI score | 0.011 (−1.849 to 1.872) | 0.003 | 0.990 | 2.628 | ||
| MMSE score | 0.774 (−4.729 to 6.276) | 0.061 | 0.778 | 2.252 |
Note: Data are given for multiple regression model.
Abbreviations: B, unstandardized coefficient; β, standardized coefficient; BI, Barthel index; BMI, body mass index; IFC-TESS, interferential current transcutaneous electrical sensory stimulation; MMSE, mini-mental state examination; MNA, mini nutritional assessment; R2, coefficient of determination; VIF, variance inflation factor; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval.