Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41904297›Full record

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

Clinical utility of voluntary cough peak expiratory flow outcomes to screen aspiration status in head and neck cancer survivors.

Beatrice Manduchi, Louisa B Suting, Emily K Plowman, Carla Warneke, George Eapen, Katherine A Hutcheson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Beatrice Manduchi *Department of Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8953-8373
Louisa B Suting *Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY, USA.
Emily K PlowmanDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA.
Carla WarnekeDepartment of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
George EapenDepartment of Pulmonary Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Katherine A HutchesonDepartment of Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. karnold@mdanderson.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3710-5706

Funding

Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas RP210042University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Survivorship Seed Money Award
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePeak expiratory flow of voluntary cough (PEF) is a physiologic metric indexing an individual’s physiologic capacity to defend the airway by expelling tracheal aspirate. PEF can be obtained in an objective, quick and inexpensive manner in busy clinical settings, with demonstrated discriminant ability to detect unsafe swallowing in neurogenic populations. This study examined the discriminant ability of voluntary cough PEF to classify aspiration status in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients post-radiotherapy (RT).

methodsThis was a secondary analysis of a prospective clinical trial of disease-free HNC survivors. Patients referred for modified barium swallow (MBS) studies ≥ 3 months post-RT underwent voluntary cough PEF assessment. Aspiration was defined as a worst Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS) score ≥ 6. Logistic regression and ROC assessed associations between maximum PEF (PEFmax) and aspiration. Optimal thresholds were determined using Youden Index and classification accuracy.

resultsAmong 152 participants, mean PEFmax was 447.6 ± 118.5 L/min. Aspirators (51/152; 34%) exhibited 13% lower PEFmax than non-aspirators (mean difference: 61.8 L/min). Lower PEFmax was significantly associated with aspiration, with a modest 5% increase in odds per 10 L/min decrease (OR = 1.005; 95% CI: 1.002–1.008; p = 0.003). The optimal threshold (≤ 475 L/min) achieved 72.5% sensitivity and 48.5% specificity; individuals below this threshold had 2.5-fold greater odds of aspiration.

conclusionVoluntary cough PEF may serve as an adjunctive rapid and pragmatic objective clinical metric for consideration in aspiration screening in HNC survivors. While moderate specificity limits stand-alone use, its simplicity makes it valuable in triage and surveillance in both resource-rich and resource-limited settings.

Indexed as

CoughDeglutition DisordersHead and Neck NeoplasmsRespiratory AspirationAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPeak Expiratory Flow RateProspective StudiesAspirationCoughDysphagiaHead and Neck CancerPeak expiratory flowScreening

Identifiers

PMID41904297
PMCPMC13249786

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.