Aging Effects on Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) Total Scores in Healthy, Community-Dwelling Adults.

Kendrea L Focht Garand, Elizabeth G Hill, Kent Armeson, Bonnie Martin-Harris
{"title":"Aging Effects on Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) Total Scores in Healthy, Community-Dwelling Adults.","authors":"Kendrea L Focht Garand,&nbsp;Elizabeth G Hill,&nbsp;Kent Armeson,&nbsp;Bonnie Martin-Harris","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The purpose of this study was to examine how aging and sex impacted scores on the Eating Assessment Tool-10 in a large sample of healthy, non-dysphagic adults. Differences in Eating Assessment Tool-10 total normal (< 3) and abnormal (≥ 3) scores were examined across four age categories (21-39 years, 40-59 years, 60-79 years, 80 years and older) and between sexes. The mean (± <i>SD</i>) Eating Assessment Tool-10 total score for this healthy cohort of 167 individuals was 0.6 (± 1.6), with the majority of participants (75%) earning a score of zero. No significant differences were found in Eating Assessment Tool-10 total scores across age categories (<i>p</i> = .53) or between sexes (<i>p</i> = .79). Post-hoc analyses further explored relationships between Eating Assessment Tool-10 total scores and swallow performance measures as observed during videofluoroscopy. All participants (<i>n</i> = 15) scoring 3 and greater on the Eating Assessment Tool-10 passed an aspiration screen (i.e., 3-ounce water swallow challenge). Nine participants scoring less than 3 and failing the aspiration screen were not observed to have airway invasion as measured by the Penetration-Aspiration Scale during videofluoroscopy. A significant relationship was not observed between Eating Assessment Tool-10 total scores and highest Penetration-Aspiration Scale score. Eating Assessment Tool-10 total scores reported in the current study for patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease were significantly lower (<i>p</i> < .001) than total scores reported in the Eating Assessment Tool-10 validation study by Belafsky et al. (2008). In summary, aging or sex effects did not appear to impact self-report of dysphagia-related symptoms as measured by the Eating Assessment Tool-10. The Eating Assessment Tool-10, therefore, may not demonstrate the sensitivity needed to capture sub-clinical changes of the aging swallowing mechanism.</p>","PeriodicalId":87227,"journal":{"name":"Canadian journal of speech-language pathology and audiology : CJSLPA = Revue canadienne d'orthophonie et d'audiologie : RCOA","volume":"44 1","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7946383/pdf/nihms-1629795.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian journal of speech-language pathology and audiology : CJSLPA = Revue canadienne d'orthophonie et d'audiologie : RCOA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine how aging and sex impacted scores on the Eating Assessment Tool-10 in a large sample of healthy, non-dysphagic adults. Differences in Eating Assessment Tool-10 total normal (< 3) and abnormal (≥ 3) scores were examined across four age categories (21-39 years, 40-59 years, 60-79 years, 80 years and older) and between sexes. The mean (± SD) Eating Assessment Tool-10 total score for this healthy cohort of 167 individuals was 0.6 (± 1.6), with the majority of participants (75%) earning a score of zero. No significant differences were found in Eating Assessment Tool-10 total scores across age categories (p = .53) or between sexes (p = .79). Post-hoc analyses further explored relationships between Eating Assessment Tool-10 total scores and swallow performance measures as observed during videofluoroscopy. All participants (n = 15) scoring 3 and greater on the Eating Assessment Tool-10 passed an aspiration screen (i.e., 3-ounce water swallow challenge). Nine participants scoring less than 3 and failing the aspiration screen were not observed to have airway invasion as measured by the Penetration-Aspiration Scale during videofluoroscopy. A significant relationship was not observed between Eating Assessment Tool-10 total scores and highest Penetration-Aspiration Scale score. Eating Assessment Tool-10 total scores reported in the current study for patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease were significantly lower (p < .001) than total scores reported in the Eating Assessment Tool-10 validation study by Belafsky et al. (2008). In summary, aging or sex effects did not appear to impact self-report of dysphagia-related symptoms as measured by the Eating Assessment Tool-10. The Eating Assessment Tool-10, therefore, may not demonstrate the sensitivity needed to capture sub-clinical changes of the aging swallowing mechanism.

健康社区居住成年人饮食评估工具-10 (EAT-10)总分的衰老影响
本研究的目的是检查年龄和性别如何影响饮食评估工具-10在一个健康的,非吞咽困难的成年人的大样本得分。进食评估工具-10总分正常(< 3分)和异常(≥3分)的差异在四个年龄类别(21-39岁、40-59岁、60-79岁、80岁及以上)和性别之间进行检查。167名健康人群的饮食评估工具-10总分的平均值(±SD)为0.6(±1.6),大多数参与者(75%)得分为零。饮食评估工具-10总分在不同年龄类别(p = 0.53)或性别之间(p = 0.79)均无显著差异。事后分析进一步探讨了进食评估工具-10总分与透视检查中观察到的吞咽性能指标之间的关系。所有在进食评估工具-10中得分为3分及以上的参与者(n = 15)都通过了吞咽测试(即吞下3盎司水的挑战)。9名得分低于3分且未通过吸入筛查的参与者在透视期间未观察到通过渗透-吸入量表测量的气道侵犯。进食评估工具-10总分与最高渗透-吸吸量表评分之间未观察到显著关系。与Belafsky等人(2008)的Eating Assessment Tool-10验证研究中报道的总分相比,本研究中报道的胃食管反流病患者的Eating Assessment Tool-10总分显著降低(p < 0.001)。总之,通过进食评估工具-10测量,年龄或性别影响似乎不会影响吞咽困难相关症状的自我报告。因此,进食评估工具-10可能无法显示捕捉衰老吞咽机制的亚临床变化所需的敏感性。
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
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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