Temporal Analysis of Factors Associated with EAT-10 in Outpatients with Oropharyngeal Dysphagia from a Tertiary Care Clinic.

From 113 patients remaining after initial exclusions, 31 lacked baseline and six-month EAT-10 scores, leaving 42 for analysis. The sample was mostly mild dysphagia, with only one patient at baseline in the severe category, so results may not apply to more severe dysphagia. The study used a single tertiary clinic database, so real-world treatment patterns, clinical rating differences, and missing data may affect findings. No instrumental swallow evaluation was repeated at six months, so the study could not compare patient-reported change with observed swallowing change. Ten of 42 patients had missing data for one EAT-10 question, and missing fields were counted as zero, which can affect scores. Income and education were based on zip code estimates, which may not represent individual patients. The PEG tube finding involved only four patients with PEG at baseline, so it is too small to support a firm conclusion. The primary outcome relied on self-report, which can be affected by reading ability, interpretation of rating scales, and introspection.

The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The article is listed as supported by NIH extramural research.

Do not read the PEG tube finding as proof that a PEG tube improves swallowing symptoms. PEG presence was only associated with EAT-10 change in four of 42 patients, and the study did not test PEG as a treatment.