ArticleEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2026
Voluntary peak cough flow: A simple and effective tool to predict dysphagia across diverse etiologies.
Article in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimSwallowing and coughing share neural and muscular substrates and play crucial roles in airway protection. This study aimed to compare voluntary peak cough flow (PCF) between patients with various dysphagia etiologies and healthy controls, and to identify a PCF cutoff value for predicting dysphagia.
methodsA total of 90 participants were included in the present case-control study. The study group (SG) consisted of 45 patients with FEES-confirmed dysphagia (M/F: 25/20) with a mean ± SD age of 66.64 ± 12.97, and the control group (CG) consisted of 45 age- and gender-matched healthy volunteers (M/F: 25/20) with a mean ± SD age of 65.56 ± 16.39. All participants underwent voluntary PCF measurement using an analog peak flow meter. The cough trials were performed five times for each subject, and the highest value obtained across the trials was recorded as PCF.
resultsThe SG exhibited significantly lower PCF compared with the CG (206.11 ± 74.22 vs. 287.78 ± 89.31 L/min, p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis identified a PCF cutoff value of ≤ 252.5 L/min for distinguishing dysphagia, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.765 (95% CI: 0.666–0.865), sensitivity of 71.1%, and specificity of 71.1%.
conclusionsVoluntary PCF was significantly reduced in individuals with diverse dysphagia etiologies compared to healthy controls and showed moderate discriminant ability to predict dysphagia. Given its simplicity, low cost, and portability, PCF measurement may serve as a practical adjunctive tool in predicting dysphagia, particularly where instrumental swallowing evaluations are not feasible.
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.