Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31402571›Full record

Trial reportNeurogastroenterology and motility2019

Effect of a gum-based thickener on the safety of swallowing in patients with poststroke oropharyngeal dysphagia.

Mireia Bolivar-Prados, Laia Rofes, Viridiana Arreola, Sonia Guida, Weslania V Nascimento, Alberto Martin, Natàlia Vilardell, Omar Ortega Fernández, Dina Ripken, Mirian Lansink and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Neurogastroenterology and motility, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
19.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

45 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 91 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Mireia Bolivar-PradosGastrointestinal Physiology Laboratory, Hospital de Mataró, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Mataró, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8896-1150
Laia RofesCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (Ciberehd), Barcelona, Spain.
Viridiana ArreolaGastrointestinal Physiology Laboratory, Hospital de Mataró, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Mataró, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3913-317X
Sonia GuidaDanone Nutricia Research, Nutricia Advanced Medical Nutrition, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Weslania V NascimentoGastrointestinal Physiology Laboratory, Hospital de Mataró, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Mataró, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1267-3475
Alberto MartinGastrointestinal Physiology Laboratory, Hospital de Mataró, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Mataró, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6805-764X
Natàlia VilardellGastrointestinal Physiology Laboratory, Hospital de Mataró, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Mataró, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1357-9889
Omar Ortega FernándezGastrointestinal Physiology Laboratory, Hospital de Mataró, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Mataró, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6178-3748
Dina RipkenDanone Nutricia Research, Nutricia Advanced Medical Nutrition, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Mirian LansinkDanone Nutricia Research, Nutricia Advanced Medical Nutrition, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Pere ClavéGastrointestinal Physiology Laboratory, Hospital de Mataró, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Mataró, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0696-8560
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESNutricia Research (Netherlands) · NLCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIncreasing viscosity with thickening agents is a valid therapeutic strategy for oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD). To assess the therapeutic effect of a xanthan gum-based thickener (Nutilis Clear

methodsA total of 120 patients with PSOD were studied in this controlled, multiple-dose, fixed-order, and single-blind study using videofluoroscopy (VFSS). A series of boluses of 10 mL thin liquid and 2000, 1400, 800, 450, 250, and 150 mPa s viscosities were given in duplicate, interrupted in case of aspiration. We assessed the safety and efficacy of swallow and the kinematics of the swallow response. KEY

resultsA total of 41.2% patients had safe swallow at thin liquid which significantly increased for all viscosities from 71.9% at 150 mPa s to 95.6% at 1400 mPa s (P < .001). PAS score (3.7 ± 2.3) at thin liquid was also reduced by increasing bolus viscosity (P < .001). The prevalence of patients with aspiration at thin liquid was 17.5% and decreased at all viscosities (P < .01), except at 150 mPa s. Increasing viscosity shortened time to laryngeal vestibule closure (LVC) at all viscosities (P < .01) and reduced bolus velocity at ≥450 mPa s (P < .05). The prevalence of patients with pharyngeal residue at each viscosity 37.7%-44.7% was similar to that at thin liquid (41.2%). CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES: The prevalence of unsafe swallow with thin liquids is very high in PSOD. Increasing shear bolus viscosity with this xanthan gum-based thickener significantly increased the safety of swallow in patients with PSOD in a viscosity-dependent manner without increasing the prevalence of pharyngeal residue.

Indexed as

Polysaccharides, BacterialAgedDeglutitionDeglutition DisordersFemaleHumansMaleRespiratory AspirationSingle-Blind MethodStrokeViscosityPolysaccharides, Bacterialxanthan gumaspirationdeglutition disordersshear viscositystrokeswallow responsethickenerxanthan gum

Identifiers

PMID31402571
PMCPMC6852432
OpenAlexW2967431907

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.