ArticleDysphagia2026
Comparison of Suprahyoid Muscle Activation During Inspiratory Muscle Training and the Shaker Exercise: An Exploratory Pilot Study.
Article in Dysphagia, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inspiratory muscle training (IMT) has been discussed in the context of swallowing rehabilitation, yet its neuromuscular characteristics relative to established swallowing exercises remain unclear. This study aimed to compare profiles of muscle activation amplitude during IMT and the Shaker exercise, with a focus on task-specific recruitment of the suprahyoid, cervical, and respiratory muscles. In a single-center, prospective crossover study, healthy young adults performed IMT using a flow-resistive device and the Shaker exercise in randomized order. Surface electromyography (sEMG) was recorded from the anterior digastric, sternocleidomastoid, trapezius, and diaphragm-related respiratory muscles. sEMG amplitudes were normalized to maximal voluntary contraction (%MVC). Paired comparisons were conducted, with outlier handling, sensitivity analyses, and exploratory equivalence testing for digastric muscle activity. Twenty-four participants were analyzed. Digastric muscle activation differed significantly between tasks, with lower activation during IMT compared with the Shaker exercise. Sternocleidomastoid and trapezius activity also showed task-dependent differences, with higher sternocleidomastoid activation during the Shaker exercise and higher trapezius activation during IMT. Diaphragm-related activity did not differ significantly between conditions. Sensitivity analyses yielded consistent findings across datasets, and equivalence for digastric activation was not demonstrated within predefined margins. IMT and the Shaker exercise impose distinct neuromuscular demands despite partial overlap in the muscles involved. Whereas the Shaker exercise directly loads the suprahyoid muscles as primary movers, IMT engages them indirectly within respiratory and postural coordination. These findings support considering IMT as a complementary, rather than substitutive, approach to established swallowing exercises.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42667361What 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.