ArticleJournal of oral rehabilitation2021
Effect of tongue-hold swallow on posterior pharyngeal wall using dynamic area detector computed tomography.
Article in Journal of oral rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of tongue-hold swallow on posterior pharyngeal wall using dynamic area detector computed tomography.Journal of oral rehabilitation · 2021Article
- Voice Quality in Individuals With Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome.International journal of language & communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to elucidate the effects of the tongue-hold swallow (THS) on the pharyngeal wall by quantifying posterior pharyngeal wall (PPW) anterior bulge during the THS. In addition, the effect of tongue protrusion length on the extent of pharyngeal wall anterior bulge was analysed.
methodsThirteen healthy subjects (6 males and 7 females, 23-43 years) underwent 320-row area detector CT during saliva swallow (SS) and THS at two tongue protrusion lengths (THS1 protrude the tongue as much as 1/3 of premeasured maximum tongue protrusion length (MTP-L) and THS2 protrude the tongue as much as 2/3 of MTP-L). To acquire images of the pharynx at rest, single-phase volume scanning was performed three times during usual breathing with no tongue protrusion (rest), protrusion of the tongue at 1/3 of MTP-L (rTHS1) and protrusion of the tongue at 2/3 of MTP-L (rTHS2). Length from cervical spine to PPW (PPW-AP) and the volume of pharyngeal cavity was measured and was compared between rest, rTHS1 and rTHS2 and between SS, THS1 and THS2. Correlation between MTP-L and PPW-AP was calculated in three conditions, SS, THS1 and THS2.
resultsPPW-AP at rest, rTHS1 and rTHS2 was 2.9 ± 0.6 mm, 3.0 ± 0.5 mm and 3.0 ± 0.5 mm, respectively, showing no significant differences across swallows. PPW-AP at the maximum pharyngeal constriction was 8.1 ± 2.0 mm, 9.1 ± 2.4 mm and 8.7 ± 2.0 mm in SS, THS1 and THS2, respectively. Compared to SS, PPW-AP in THS1 was significantly larger (p = 0.04) and PPW-AP in THS2 was not significantly different (p = 0.09). Pharyngeal volume at rest, rTHS1 and rTHS2 was 16.4 ± 5.2 mm DISCUSSION: This study demonstrated that the expanded pharyngeal cavity due to the tongue protrusion was completely obliterated by the increase in anterior motion of pharyngeal wall during THS. It also became clear that the degree of tongue protrusion did not linearly correlate with the movement of PPW during THS. There was no relationship between PPW motion and the MTP-L, suggesting that the effect of tongue protrusion is better determined in each subject by analysing the motion of PPW using imaging tools.
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.