The State of Exercise-Based Dysphagia Intervention in the Literature: A Scoping Review

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
Claire Crossman, Serena Piol, D'manda Price, Kelly Veit, Sonja M. Molfenter
{"title":"The State of Exercise-Based Dysphagia Intervention in the Literature: A Scoping Review","authors":"Claire Crossman,&nbsp;Serena Piol,&nbsp;D'manda Price,&nbsp;Kelly Veit,&nbsp;Sonja M. Molfenter","doi":"10.1002/lio2.70180","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Exercise-based interventions for dysphagia are frequently recommended in the clinical setting. We aim to characterize the state of the dysphagia treatment literature to provide a high-level overview on four domains: Study characteristics, patient populations, exercise characteristics, and outcome measures reported. This review acts as an initial step in analyzing the proposed gap between research and clinical practice patterns.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A search strategy was executed across five databases to capture publications evaluating the impact of exercise-based interventions on swallow function. After removing duplicates, 20,583 abstracts were screened for inclusion, with 505 studies eligible for full-text review. After applying exclusionary criteria, information was extracted from 204 publications.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Results indicate that studies are predominantly prospective (88%) and often randomized controlled trials (44%) typically completed in the outpatient setting (59%). Most studies represent homogenous patient groups (88%) with an average age of 64 years. Exercise paradigms average 40 days in length. Forty-six target exercises are reported, with Effortful Swallow being the most common (37%). Forty percent of studies evaluate the efficacy of a single exercise in isolation, followed by a combination approach of 4+ exercises (34%) and 2–3 exercises (26%). Thirty-seven different therapeutic devices are reported. Most (65%) studies use instrumental examinations to evaluate treatment efficacy, with 52 unique methods for analysis reported. Further, over 100 unique clinical outcome measures are reported.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>This scoping review highlights many relative strengths in the dysphagia treatment literature (e.g., on parameters related to study design and outcome measures). At the same time, the findings suggest that there is significantly less literature to extrapolate to typical clinical caseloads and practice patterns with respect to patient characteristics, care settings, and exercise characteristics.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Level of Evidence</h3>\n \n <p>I, scoping review of available evidence.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48529,"journal":{"name":"Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology","volume":"10 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/lio2.70180","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lio2.70180","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Exercise-based interventions for dysphagia are frequently recommended in the clinical setting. We aim to characterize the state of the dysphagia treatment literature to provide a high-level overview on four domains: Study characteristics, patient populations, exercise characteristics, and outcome measures reported. This review acts as an initial step in analyzing the proposed gap between research and clinical practice patterns.

Methods

A search strategy was executed across five databases to capture publications evaluating the impact of exercise-based interventions on swallow function. After removing duplicates, 20,583 abstracts were screened for inclusion, with 505 studies eligible for full-text review. After applying exclusionary criteria, information was extracted from 204 publications.

Results

Results indicate that studies are predominantly prospective (88%) and often randomized controlled trials (44%) typically completed in the outpatient setting (59%). Most studies represent homogenous patient groups (88%) with an average age of 64 years. Exercise paradigms average 40 days in length. Forty-six target exercises are reported, with Effortful Swallow being the most common (37%). Forty percent of studies evaluate the efficacy of a single exercise in isolation, followed by a combination approach of 4+ exercises (34%) and 2–3 exercises (26%). Thirty-seven different therapeutic devices are reported. Most (65%) studies use instrumental examinations to evaluate treatment efficacy, with 52 unique methods for analysis reported. Further, over 100 unique clinical outcome measures are reported.

Conclusions

This scoping review highlights many relative strengths in the dysphagia treatment literature (e.g., on parameters related to study design and outcome measures). At the same time, the findings suggest that there is significantly less literature to extrapolate to typical clinical caseloads and practice patterns with respect to patient characteristics, care settings, and exercise characteristics.

Level of Evidence

I, scoping review of available evidence.

Abstract Image

文献中基于运动的吞咽困难干预状态:范围综述
临床经常推荐以运动为基础的吞咽困难干预。我们的目标是描述吞咽困难治疗文献的状态,提供四个领域的高层次概述:研究特征、患者群体、运动特征和报告的结果测量。这篇综述作为分析研究和临床实践模式之间的差距的第一步。方法在五个数据库中执行搜索策略,以获取评估运动干预对吞咽功能影响的出版物。在剔除重复项后,20,583篇摘要被筛选纳入,其中505篇研究符合全文综述的条件。应用排除标准后,从204篇出版物中提取信息。结果表明,研究主要是前瞻性的(88%),通常是随机对照试验(44%),通常是在门诊环境中完成的(59%)。大多数研究代表平均年龄为64岁的同质患者组(88%)。锻炼范例的平均长度为40天。报告了46种目标练习,其中最常见的是用力吞咽(37%)。40%的研究单独评估单一运动的效果,其次是4+运动(34%)和2-3运动(26%)的组合方法。报道了37种不同的治疗装置。大多数(65%)研究使用仪器检查来评估治疗效果,报告了52种独特的分析方法。此外,报告了100多种独特的临床结果测量。结论:该范围综述强调了吞咽困难治疗文献中的许多相对优势(例如,与研究设计和结果测量相关的参数)。同时,研究结果表明,在患者特征、护理环境和运动特征方面,可以推断典型临床病例量和实践模式的文献明显较少。证据水平1,对现有证据的范围审查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
245
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信