ArticleClinical interventions in aging2024
Efficacy of an Aspiration Prevention Program That Utilizes the Gugging Swallowing Screen in Older Patients.
Article in Clinical interventions in aging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Efficient Suprahyoid Muscle Contraction by Combined Modulated Currents in Mice.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Older patients have a higher risk of aspiration pneumonia and mortality if they are hospitalized. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of an aspiration prevention quality improvement (QI) program that utilizes the Gugging Swallowing Screen (GUSS) in older patients. Patients and Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in an acute medical care unit of a tertiary hospital in South Korea. The study used one-to-one propensity matching and included 96 patients who received the QI program and 96 who did not. All patients were aged 65 years or older and had risk factors for aspiration, including neurological and non-neurological disorders, neuromuscular disorders, impaired airway defenses, and dysphagia due to esophageal or gastrointestinal disorders. The primary outcomes included the duration of the fasting period during hospitalization, changes in nutritional status before admission and at discharge, in-hospital mortality, and readmission due to pneumonia within 90 days. Results: Fasting period, changes in weight and albumin levels upon discharge after hospitalization, and length of stay did not differ significantly between patients in the GUSS and non-GUSS groups. However, the risk of readmission within 90 days was significantly lower in patients who underwent the GUSS than in those who did not (hazard ratio, 0.085; 95% confidence interval, 0.025-0.290; p = 0.001). Conclusion: The GUSS aspiration prevention program effectively prevented readmission due to pneumonia within 90 days in older patients with acute illnesses. This implies that the adoption of efficient aspiration prevention methods in older patients with acute illnesses could play a pivotal role by enhancing patient outcomes and potentially mitigating the healthcare costs linked to readmissions.
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.