A comparison of the swallowing function and quality of life by oral intake level in stroke patients with dysphagia.
Deok Gi Hong, Doo Han Yoo
PMID 28931986WHAT IT FOUND
Stroke patients with dysphagia grouped as oral intake scored higher on most swallowing and quality-of-life domain scores than those grouped as non-oral intake.
The grouping used the swallowing score, so this is an association, not proof that oral intake improves quality of life.
Key findings
01Participants grouped as oral intake had higher mean total Swallowing Function Test scores than participants grouped as non-oral intake.
02The oral intake group reported higher scores on several Swallowing Quality of Life domains than the non-oral intake group.
03The oral and non-oral intake groups were defined by a cutoff on the Swallowing Function Test, and the same test was then compared between the groups.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The oral intake and non-oral intake groups were defined using the Swallowing Function Test score, and the Swallowing Function Test was then compared between those groups, so the swallowing-function difference is partly built into the grouping. The study was cross-sectional and did not follow patients over time, so it cannot show that oral intake improves swallowing function or quality of life. The paper did not state a primary outcome, and the results text and tables disagree about whether total Swallowing Function Test and total Swallowing Quality of Life scores differed between groups. It included only stroke patients from a rehabilitation hospital in South Korea, so it may not apply to patients with dysphagia from other causes or to other settings. The analysis did not consider the effect of any specific type of oral diet. The paper did not report whether baseline characteristics were adjusted for, or how missing responses were handled.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that making a patient able to eat orally will improve quality of life. The groups were split by a swallowing test score, the study did not follow patients over time, and the total quality-of-life result is inconsistent between the text and the table.