From Bench to Bedside: Evaluating a Low-Cost Tongue Pressure Device Prototype for Clinical and Community Use.

IF 2.1 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Myint Thu, Boosana Kaboosaya, Arporn Teeramongkonrasmee, Panuwat Janpugdee
{"title":"From Bench to Bedside: Evaluating a Low-Cost Tongue Pressure Device Prototype for Clinical and Community Use.","authors":"Myint Thu, Boosana Kaboosaya, Arporn Teeramongkonrasmee, Panuwat Janpugdee","doi":"10.4103/jispcd.jispcd_90_25","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study evaluated the test-retest reliability, concurrent validity, and usability of the Chulalongkorn University Prototype Tongue Pressure Instrument (CUPTI), a novel low-cost manometer for maximum tongue strength (MTS) measurement, in comparison to the standard Iowa Oral Performance Instrument (IOPI).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Sixty healthy adults (20-80 years) were randomized into two groups in a cross-over design. Participants underwent MTS assessment using both devices. Reliability was assessed through intraclass correlation coefficients, while concurrent validity was evaluated through Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman analysis. Effect size (Cohen's <i>d</i>) was used to assess discriminative ability. Measurement time was compared using a paired <i>t</i> test, and multivariable regression was conducted to assess demographic associations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both CUPTI and IOPI demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (ICC > 0.95). CUPTI consistently recorded lower MTS values, with a mean bias of -8.12 kPa (limit of agreement: -2.52 to 18.76 kPa). A strong correlation (<i>r</i> = 0.93, <i>P</i> < 0.001) was observed between devices. The effect size of 0.61 indicated a moderate, clinically meaningful difference. CUPTI required slightly more time than IOPI for MTS assessment (<i>P</i> = 0.005). Age was the only significant predictor of MTS (<i>P</i> = 0.034).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CUPTI is a valid and reliable alternative to IOPI, offering affordability and accessibility for clinical and community dysphagia screening. Its performance supports implementation in resource-constrained settings and home-based rehabilitation.</p>","PeriodicalId":47247,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistry","volume":"15 4","pages":"382-390"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12425403/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.jispcd_90_25","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: This study evaluated the test-retest reliability, concurrent validity, and usability of the Chulalongkorn University Prototype Tongue Pressure Instrument (CUPTI), a novel low-cost manometer for maximum tongue strength (MTS) measurement, in comparison to the standard Iowa Oral Performance Instrument (IOPI).

Materials and methods: Sixty healthy adults (20-80 years) were randomized into two groups in a cross-over design. Participants underwent MTS assessment using both devices. Reliability was assessed through intraclass correlation coefficients, while concurrent validity was evaluated through Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman analysis. Effect size (Cohen's d) was used to assess discriminative ability. Measurement time was compared using a paired t test, and multivariable regression was conducted to assess demographic associations.

Results: Both CUPTI and IOPI demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (ICC > 0.95). CUPTI consistently recorded lower MTS values, with a mean bias of -8.12 kPa (limit of agreement: -2.52 to 18.76 kPa). A strong correlation (r = 0.93, P < 0.001) was observed between devices. The effect size of 0.61 indicated a moderate, clinically meaningful difference. CUPTI required slightly more time than IOPI for MTS assessment (P = 0.005). Age was the only significant predictor of MTS (P = 0.034).

Conclusion: CUPTI is a valid and reliable alternative to IOPI, offering affordability and accessibility for clinical and community dysphagia screening. Its performance supports implementation in resource-constrained settings and home-based rehabilitation.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

从实验台到床边:评估临床和社区使用的低成本舌压装置原型。
目的:本研究评估了朱拉隆功大学原型舌压仪(CUPTI)的重测信度、并发效度和可用性,这是一种新型的低成本舌压仪,用于测量最大舌强度(MTS),并与标准的爱荷华口腔性能仪(IOPI)进行了比较。材料与方法:60例20 ~ 80岁的健康成人,采用交叉设计随机分为两组。参与者使用两种设备进行MTS评估。信度采用类内相关系数评估,并发效度采用Pearson相关和Bland-Altman分析评估。效应量(Cohen’s d)用于评估辨别能力。测量时间采用配对t检验进行比较,并进行多变量回归来评估人口统计学关联。结果:CUPTI和IOPI均具有良好的重测信度(ICC > 0.95)。CUPTI持续记录较低的MTS值,平均偏差为-8.12 kPa(一致性限制:-2.52至18.76 kPa)。两种设备之间存在很强的相关性(r = 0.93, P < 0.001)。效应值为0.61,表明存在中度的、有临床意义的差异。CUPTI评估MTS所需的时间略多于IOPI (P = 0.005)。年龄是MTS的唯一显著预测因子(P = 0.034)。结论:CUPTI是IOPI的有效和可靠的替代方法,可用于临床和社区的吞咽困难筛查。其绩效支持在资源受限环境下的实施和基于家庭的康复。
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
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
123
期刊介绍: It is a journal aimed for research, scientific facts and details covering all specialties of dentistry with a good determination for exploring and sharing the knowledge in the medical and dental fraternity. The scope is therefore huge covering almost all streams of dentistry - starting from original studies, systematic reviews, narrative reviews, very unique case reports. Journal scope is not limited to these subjects and is more wider covering all specialities of dentistry follows: -Preventive and Community dentistry (Dental public health)- Endodontics- Oral and maxillofacial pathology- Oral and maxillofacial radiology- Oral and maxillofacial surgery (also called oral surgery)- Orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics- Periodontology (also called periodontics)- Pediatric dentistry (also called pedodontics)- Prosthodontics (also called prosthetic dentistry)- Oral medicine- Special needs dentistry (also called special care dentistry)- Oral Biology- Forensic odontology- Geriatric dentistry or Geriodontics- Preventive and Social Medicine (Public health)- Our journal appreciates research articles pertaining with advancement of dentistry, preventive and community dentistry including oral epidemiology, oral health services research, oral health education and promotion, behavioral sciences related to dentistry, dental jurisprudence, ethics and oral health, economics, and quality assessment, recent advances in preventive dentistry and community dentistry.
×
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