患有口咽吞咽困难的成人在气道入侵时的咳嗽效果:文献系统性综述

Rubab Alhussainy, Chiara Bertolini, C. Kenny
{"title":"患有口咽吞咽困难的成人在气道入侵时的咳嗽效果:文献系统性综述","authors":"Rubab Alhussainy, Chiara Bertolini, C. Kenny","doi":"10.3233/acs-230012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND: Cough and swallowing share common neuroanatomic pathways, leading to an overlap between their mechanisms. Despite the widely recognised role of cough as an airway defence mechanism, empirical evidence supporting its effectiveness for airway clearance is lacking. OBJECTIVE: This review summarises and appraises available evidence regarding the effectiveness of cough in response to airway penetration and/or aspiration during videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS) or flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) in adults with oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) of any aetiology. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines were followed. Literature search was conducted in March 2023 and updated in March 2024 across six databases without publication status, language, or date restrictions. Two independent reviewers performed screening, with disagreements resolved through consensus and majority vote. The principal investigator conducted data extraction and quality appraisal using the Downs and Black checklist. RESULTS: Of 6,049 studies retrieved, 25 met the eligibility criteria. Due to heterogeneous reporting, a summary of participant demographics could not be compiled. Absence of a standardised method for measuring cough effectiveness meant meta-analysis was impossible. Nonetheless, an effective cough response to penetration/aspiration was noted for some participants within 17 studies, ineffective cough responses for some within 17 studies, while one study reported a partially effective cough response for participants. CONCLUSIONS: Robust evidence on cough effectiveness is lacking due to study heterogeneity and inconsistent reporting. Developing a standardised tool to assess cough effectiveness would ensure consistency and comparability across studies, improving clinical reporting of VFSS and FEES outcomes.","PeriodicalId":93726,"journal":{"name":"Advances in communication and swallowing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cough effectiveness during airway invasion in adults with oropharyngeal dysphagia: A systematic review of literature\",\"authors\":\"Rubab Alhussainy, Chiara Bertolini, C. Kenny\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/acs-230012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND: Cough and swallowing share common neuroanatomic pathways, leading to an overlap between their mechanisms. Despite the widely recognised role of cough as an airway defence mechanism, empirical evidence supporting its effectiveness for airway clearance is lacking. OBJECTIVE: This review summarises and appraises available evidence regarding the effectiveness of cough in response to airway penetration and/or aspiration during videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS) or flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) in adults with oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) of any aetiology. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines were followed. Literature search was conducted in March 2023 and updated in March 2024 across six databases without publication status, language, or date restrictions. Two independent reviewers performed screening, with disagreements resolved through consensus and majority vote. The principal investigator conducted data extraction and quality appraisal using the Downs and Black checklist. RESULTS: Of 6,049 studies retrieved, 25 met the eligibility criteria. Due to heterogeneous reporting, a summary of participant demographics could not be compiled. Absence of a standardised method for measuring cough effectiveness meant meta-analysis was impossible. Nonetheless, an effective cough response to penetration/aspiration was noted for some participants within 17 studies, ineffective cough responses for some within 17 studies, while one study reported a partially effective cough response for participants. CONCLUSIONS: Robust evidence on cough effectiveness is lacking due to study heterogeneity and inconsistent reporting. Developing a standardised tool to assess cough effectiveness would ensure consistency and comparability across studies, improving clinical reporting of VFSS and FEES outcomes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93726,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in communication and swallowing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in communication and swallowing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/acs-230012\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in communication and swallowing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/acs-230012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:咳嗽和吞咽具有共同的神经解剖路径,这导致了两者机制的重叠。尽管咳嗽作为气道防御机制的作用已得到广泛认可,但支持其有效清除气道的实证证据仍然缺乏。目的:本综述总结并评估了在对任何病因的成人口咽吞咽困难(OD)患者进行视频荧光吞咽检查(VFSS)或柔性内窥镜吞咽评估(FEES)时,针对气道穿透和/或吸入进行咳嗽的有效性的现有证据。方法:遵循《系统综述和元分析首选报告项目》指南。文献检索于 2023 年 3 月在六个数据库中进行,并于 2024 年 3 月更新,无出版状态、语言或日期限制。由两名独立审稿人进行筛选,并通过协商一致和多数票解决分歧。主要研究者使用唐斯和布莱克核对表进行数据提取和质量评估。结果:在检索到的 6049 项研究中,有 25 项符合资格标准。由于报告内容不尽相同,因此无法汇总参与者的人口统计数据。由于缺乏衡量咳嗽有效性的标准化方法,因此无法进行荟萃分析。尽管如此,在 17 项研究中,一些参与者对穿刺/吸气的咳嗽反应有效,而在 17 项研究中,一些参与者的咳嗽反应无效,还有一项研究报告称参与者的咳嗽反应部分有效。结论:由于研究的异质性和报告的不一致性,目前还缺乏有关咳嗽有效性的有力证据。开发一种评估咳嗽有效性的标准化工具可确保不同研究之间的一致性和可比性,从而改进 VFSS 和 FEES 结果的临床报告。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cough effectiveness during airway invasion in adults with oropharyngeal dysphagia: A systematic review of literature
BACKGROUND: Cough and swallowing share common neuroanatomic pathways, leading to an overlap between their mechanisms. Despite the widely recognised role of cough as an airway defence mechanism, empirical evidence supporting its effectiveness for airway clearance is lacking. OBJECTIVE: This review summarises and appraises available evidence regarding the effectiveness of cough in response to airway penetration and/or aspiration during videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS) or flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) in adults with oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) of any aetiology. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines were followed. Literature search was conducted in March 2023 and updated in March 2024 across six databases without publication status, language, or date restrictions. Two independent reviewers performed screening, with disagreements resolved through consensus and majority vote. The principal investigator conducted data extraction and quality appraisal using the Downs and Black checklist. RESULTS: Of 6,049 studies retrieved, 25 met the eligibility criteria. Due to heterogeneous reporting, a summary of participant demographics could not be compiled. Absence of a standardised method for measuring cough effectiveness meant meta-analysis was impossible. Nonetheless, an effective cough response to penetration/aspiration was noted for some participants within 17 studies, ineffective cough responses for some within 17 studies, while one study reported a partially effective cough response for participants. CONCLUSIONS: Robust evidence on cough effectiveness is lacking due to study heterogeneity and inconsistent reporting. Developing a standardised tool to assess cough effectiveness would ensure consistency and comparability across studies, improving clinical reporting of VFSS and FEES outcomes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信