| Literature DB >> 35206991 |
Naomi Yagi1, Yoshitada Sakai2, Naoko Kawamura1, Hitoshi Maezawa3, Yutaka Hata4, Masayuki Hirata3, Hideki Kashioka5, Toshio Yanagida5.
Abstract
It has recently been shown that the aging population is refractory to the maintenance of swallowing function, which can seriously affect quality of life. Singing and vocal training contribute to mastication, swallowing and respiratory function. Previous studies have shown that singers have better vocal cord health. No consensus has been reached as to how vocal training affects swallowing ability. Our study was designed to establish evidence that singers are statistically superior at inducing the swallowing reflex. To test our hypothesis, we undertook a clinical trial on 55 singers and 141 non-singers (mean age: 60.1 ± 11.7 years). This cross-sectional study with propensity score matching resulted in significant differences in a repetitive saliva swallowing test among singers: 7.1 ± 2.4, n = 53 vs. non-singers: 5.9 ± 1.9, n = 53, p < 0.05. We conclude that singing can serve an important role in stabilizing the impact of voluntary swallowing on speech.Entities:
Keywords: RSST; inducibility of swallowing flex; singing; voluntary swallowing
Year: 2022 PMID: 35206991 PMCID: PMC8871987 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10020377
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Healthcare (Basel) ISSN: 2227-9032
Figure 1Flow diagram summarizing study selection criteria.
Full Cohort Demographic and Clinical Data.
| All Subjects | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| N | 196 | ||
| Male | Female | ||
| Group | Singers | 6 | 49 |
| Non-singers | 51 | 90 | |
| range | |||
| Age | [years] | 40–93 | |
| BMI | [kg/m2] | 16.2–38.8 | |
| Grip strength | [kg] | 15.7–55.3 | |
| RSST | [times] | 3–16 | |
| MPT | [sec] | 6–62 | |
Continuous variables are presented as the mean ± SD and range.
Correlations between parameters associated with swallowing ability.
| RSST | Age | BMI | Grip Strength | MPT | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Singers | RSST | 1.0000 | −0.1815 | −0.2037 | 0.2219 | 0.2605 |
| Age | −0.1815 | 1.0000 | 0.2306 | −0.3093 * | −0.0192 | |
| BMI | −0.2037 | 0.2306 | 1.0000 | 0.1317 | −0.1448 | |
| Grip strength | 0.2219 | −0.3093 * | 0.1317 | 1.0000 | 0.2402 | |
| MPT | 0.2605 | −0.0192 | −0.1448 | 0.2402 | 1.0000 | |
| Non-singers | RSST | 1.0000 | −0.2344 ** | −0.0335 | 0.2446 # | 0.1778 * |
| Age | −0.2344 ** | 1.0000 | −0.1096 | −0.3150 ## | −0.2043 * | |
| BMI | −0.0335 | −0.1096 | 1.0000 | 0.3299 ## | −0.0284 | |
| Grip strength | 0.2446 # | −0.3150 ## | 0.3299 ## | 1.0000 | 0.2829 ## | |
| MPT | 0.1778 * | −0.2043 * | −0.0284 | 0.2829 ## | 1.0000 | |
| Both | RSST | 1.0000 | −0.2042 # | −0.0884 | 0.1815 * | 0.1859 ** |
| Age | −0.2042 # | 1.0000 | −0.0382 | −0.3196 ## | −0.1696 * | |
| BMI | −0.0884 | −0.0382 | 1.0000 | 0.2965 ## | −0.0501 | |
| Grip strength | 0.1815 * | −0.3196 ## | 0.2965 ## | 1.0000 | 0.2811 ## | |
| MPT | 0.1859 ** | −0.1696 * | −0.0501 | 0.2811 ## | 1.0000 |
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, # p < 0.005, ## p < 0.001.
Covariate imbalance prior to matching and matched samples.
| ( | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| N | 55 | 141 | ||||
| Used | Gender | 0.0005 | 0.6237 | |||
| Male | ([%]) | 6 (10.9) | 51 (36.2) | |||
| Female | ([%]) | 49 (89.1) | 90 (63.8) | |||
| Age | [years] | 61.5 ± 10.2 | 59.6 ± 12.2 | 0.3039 | 0.1704 | |
| (range) | (40–82) | (40–93) | ||||
| BMI | [kg/m2] | 22.2 ± 2.9 | 22.6 ± 3.3 | 0.4302 | 0.1289 | |
| (range) | (16.9–29.8) | (16.2–38.8) | ||||
| Grip Strength | [kg] | 26.0 ± 5.8 | 31.4 ± 9.5 | 0.0001 | 0.6843 | |
| (range) | (15.7–44.3) | (15.9–55.3) | ||||
| Non-used | RSST | [times] | 7.0 ± 2.5 | 6.2 ± 2.1 | 0.0430 | 0.3134 |
| (range) | (3–16) | (3–13) | ||||
| MPT | [sec] | 22.7 ± 7.9 | 24.1 ± 9.7 | 0.3651 | 0.1504 | |
| (range) | (8–45) | (6–62) | ||||
| ( | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| N | 53 | 53 | ||||
| Used | Gender | 1.0000 | 0.0000 | |||
| Male | ([%]) | 5 (9.4) | 5 (9.4) | |||
| Female | ([%]) | 48 (90.6) | 48 (90.6) | |||
| Age | [years] | 61.4 ± 10.3 | 61.2 ± 13.5 | 0.9292 | 0.0173 | |
| (range) | (40–82) | (40–93) | ||||
| BMI | [kg/m2] | 22.1 ± 3.0 | 22.5 ± 3.6 | 0.5175 | 0.1262 | |
| (range) | (16.9–29.8) | (16.8–38.8) | ||||
| Grip Strength | [kg] | 26.2 ± 5.8 | 26.4 ± 5.9 | 0.9149 | 0.0208 | |
| (range) | (15.7–44.3) | (15.9–43.0) | ||||
| Non-used | RSST | [times] | 7.1 ± 2.4 | 5.9 ± 1.9 | 0.0109 | 0.5039 |
| (range) | (3–16) | (3–11) | ||||
| MPT | [sec] | 22.7 ± 7.8 | 22.1 ± 8.7 | 0.7162 | 0.0708 | |
| (range) | (8–45) | (10–52) | ||||
Continuous variables are presented as the mean ± SD (range).
Figure 2RSST and MPT scores before and after matching.
Univariate analysis of RSST score.
| Singers | Non-Singers | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Factor | r | 95% CI | r | 95% CI | ||
| Age | −0.1590 | −0.4116–0.1163 | 0.2554 | −0.3447 | −0.5626–−0.0821 | 0.0115 |
| BMI | −0.1930 | −0.4404–0.0815 | 0.1661 | −0.1442 | −0.3989–0.1312 | 0.3030 |
| Grip strength | 0.1859 | −0.0889–0.4344 | 0.1826 | 0.2576 | −0.0137–0.4935 | 0.0626 |
| MPT | 0.2458 | −0.0263–0.4839 | 0.0761 | 0.3258 | 0.0609–0.5478 | 0.0173 |
r: Pearson’s correlation coefficient.
Figure 3ANCOVA of RSST score: (a) ANCOVA of age plotted as a function of RSST score, RSST = −0.045 × Age + 9.837 − 1.122× Group (Singers: Group = 0, Non-singers: Group = 1, p = 0.0084); (b) ANCOVA of grip strength plotted as a function of RSST score, RSST = 0.081 × Grip strength + 4.931 − 1.124 × Group (Singers: Group = 0, Non-singers: Group = 1, p = 0.0089).