Trial reportDysphagia2012
Outcomes of a pilot water protocol project in a rehabilitation setting.
Trial report in Dysphagia, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Living with oropharyngeal dysphagia: effects of bolus modification on health-related quality of life--a systematic review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2015Pooled it
- Trial
- Implementation of a free water protocol at a long term acute care hospital.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- The Japanese Dysphagia Diet of 2021 by the Japanese Society of Dysphagia Rehabilitation.Japanese journal of comprehensive rehabilitation science · 2022Article
- The Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System: Implications for Improvements in Research Design, Reporting, Replication, and Synthesis.Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2019Article
- Implementing the Free Water Protocol does not Result in Aspiration Pneumonia in Carefully Selected Patients with Dysphagia: A Systematic Review.Dysphagia · 2017Article
- Implementing oral care to reduce aspiration pneumonia amongst patients with dysphagia in a South African setting.The South African journal of communication disorders = Die Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir Kommunikasieafwykings · 2016Article
- Can we use influencing factors to predict aspiration pneumonia in the United Kingdom?Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is considerable clinical interest in the risks and benefits of offering oral water intake, in the form of water protocols, to patients with thin-liquid dysphagia. We describe the design and implementation of a water protocol for patients in a rehabilitation setting with videofluoroscopically confirmed thin-liquid aspiration. The GF Strong Water Protocol (GFSWP) is an interdisciplinary initiative, with roles and accountabilities specified for different members of the interprofessional health-care team. Rules of the water protocol specify mode of water access (independent, supervised), the implementation of any safe swallowing strategies recommended on the basis of the patient's videofluoroscopy, and procedures for evaluating and addressing oral care needs. Trial implementation of the water protocol in 15 participants showed that they remained free of adverse events, including pneumonia, over the course of an initial 14-day trial and continuing until discharge from the facility (range = 13-108 days). Seven participants were randomly assigned to a 14-day control phase in which they received standard care (without water access). Fluid intake measures taken after the oral water intake phase were increased (mean = 1,845 cc; 95% confidence interval: 1,520-2,169 cc) compared to those in the control phase (mean = 1,474 cc; 95% CI: 1,113-1,836 cc), with oral water intake measures comprising, on average, 563 cc (range = 238-888 cc) of the total post water trial fluid intake values. Fluid intake increased at least 10% of the calculated fluid requirements in 11/15 participants who received oral water access. These participants reported favorable quality-of-life outcomes, measured using the Swal-QOL. These findings support the implementation of the GFSWP, including its exclusion criteria, rules, and plans of care, for rehabilitation patients who aspirate thin liquids.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.