测量吞咽困难的增稠液体的粘度和稠度:不同方法之间是否存在相关性?

IF 4.7 2区 农林科学 Q1 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Foods Pub Date : 2025-07-05 DOI:10.3390/foods14132384
Javier Marín-Sánchez, Sofía Gimeno-Ruiz, Alejandro Berzosa, Javier Raso, Cristina Sánchez-Gimeno
{"title":"测量吞咽困难的增稠液体的粘度和稠度:不同方法之间是否存在相关性?","authors":"Javier Marín-Sánchez, Sofía Gimeno-Ruiz, Alejandro Berzosa, Javier Raso, Cristina Sánchez-Gimeno","doi":"10.3390/foods14132384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Dysphagia is a common clinical condition, especially among older adults, associated with an increased risk of malnutrition, aspiration, and respiratory complications. A key therapeutic approach involves modifying liquid consistency using thickening agents to achieve safer swallowing. Although rotational rheometry offers accurate viscosity characterization, its complexity and cost limit routine application in clinical or domestic settings. This study evaluates and correlates different methods for measuring the viscosity of thickened liquids, comparing rheological data with empirical techniques such as the Ford cup, Bostwick consistometer, and Line-Spread Test (LST). Several thickeners were tested-guar gum, xanthan gum, a guar/xanthan blend, maltodextrin-based mixtures, and a commercial thickener-across a range of concentrations, temperatures, and preparation times. The results demonstrate that simple methods, particularly the Bostwick consistometer and LST, show strong correlations with rheometer measurements within the International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) Level 2 (mildly thick) and Level 3 (moderately thick) ranges. However, limitations were observed at extreme viscosities, where certain methods lacked sensitivity or operational feasibility. These findings support the potential of empirical tools for practical viscosity screening in dysphagia management, especially where rheometry is unavailable. This work provides evidence-based guidance for clinicians, caregivers, and food service professionals seeking safe, reproducible, and standardized approaches to fluid consistency assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":12386,"journal":{"name":"Foods","volume":"14 13","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12248840/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measuring Viscosity and Consistency in Thickened Liquids for Dysphagia: Is There a Correlation Between Different Methods?\",\"authors\":\"Javier Marín-Sánchez, Sofía Gimeno-Ruiz, Alejandro Berzosa, Javier Raso, Cristina Sánchez-Gimeno\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/foods14132384\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Dysphagia is a common clinical condition, especially among older adults, associated with an increased risk of malnutrition, aspiration, and respiratory complications. A key therapeutic approach involves modifying liquid consistency using thickening agents to achieve safer swallowing. Although rotational rheometry offers accurate viscosity characterization, its complexity and cost limit routine application in clinical or domestic settings. This study evaluates and correlates different methods for measuring the viscosity of thickened liquids, comparing rheological data with empirical techniques such as the Ford cup, Bostwick consistometer, and Line-Spread Test (LST). Several thickeners were tested-guar gum, xanthan gum, a guar/xanthan blend, maltodextrin-based mixtures, and a commercial thickener-across a range of concentrations, temperatures, and preparation times. The results demonstrate that simple methods, particularly the Bostwick consistometer and LST, show strong correlations with rheometer measurements within the International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) Level 2 (mildly thick) and Level 3 (moderately thick) ranges. However, limitations were observed at extreme viscosities, where certain methods lacked sensitivity or operational feasibility. These findings support the potential of empirical tools for practical viscosity screening in dysphagia management, especially where rheometry is unavailable. This work provides evidence-based guidance for clinicians, caregivers, and food service professionals seeking safe, reproducible, and standardized approaches to fluid consistency assessment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12386,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Foods\",\"volume\":\"14 13\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12248840/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Foods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14132384\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foods","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14132384","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

吞咽困难是一种常见的临床疾病,特别是在老年人中,与营养不良、误吸和呼吸系统并发症的风险增加有关。一个关键的治疗方法包括使用增稠剂来改变液体的稠度,以达到更安全的吞咽。虽然旋转流变仪提供了准确的粘度表征,但其复杂性和成本限制了其在临床或家庭环境中的常规应用。本研究评估并关联了测量增稠液体粘度的不同方法,将流变学数据与经验技术(如福特杯、Bostwick稠度计和线展测试(LST))进行比较。测试了几种增稠剂——瓜尔胶、黄原胶、瓜尔胶/黄原胶混合物、麦芽糖糊精混合物和一种商用增稠剂——在不同浓度、温度和制备时间范围内进行了测试。结果表明,简单的方法,特别是Bostwick稠度计和LST,与国际吞咽困难饮食标准化倡议(IDDSI) 2级(轻度粘稠)和3级(中度粘稠)范围内的流变仪测量结果具有很强的相关性。然而,在极端粘度下,某些方法缺乏灵敏度或操作可行性,因此存在局限性。这些发现支持了经验工具在吞咽困难管理中实际粘度筛选的潜力,特别是在无法使用流变仪的情况下。这项工作为临床医生、护理人员和食品服务专业人员寻求安全、可重复和标准化的液体一致性评估方法提供了循证指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Measuring Viscosity and Consistency in Thickened Liquids for Dysphagia: Is There a Correlation Between Different Methods?

Dysphagia is a common clinical condition, especially among older adults, associated with an increased risk of malnutrition, aspiration, and respiratory complications. A key therapeutic approach involves modifying liquid consistency using thickening agents to achieve safer swallowing. Although rotational rheometry offers accurate viscosity characterization, its complexity and cost limit routine application in clinical or domestic settings. This study evaluates and correlates different methods for measuring the viscosity of thickened liquids, comparing rheological data with empirical techniques such as the Ford cup, Bostwick consistometer, and Line-Spread Test (LST). Several thickeners were tested-guar gum, xanthan gum, a guar/xanthan blend, maltodextrin-based mixtures, and a commercial thickener-across a range of concentrations, temperatures, and preparation times. The results demonstrate that simple methods, particularly the Bostwick consistometer and LST, show strong correlations with rheometer measurements within the International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) Level 2 (mildly thick) and Level 3 (moderately thick) ranges. However, limitations were observed at extreme viscosities, where certain methods lacked sensitivity or operational feasibility. These findings support the potential of empirical tools for practical viscosity screening in dysphagia management, especially where rheometry is unavailable. This work provides evidence-based guidance for clinicians, caregivers, and food service professionals seeking safe, reproducible, and standardized approaches to fluid consistency assessment.

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
Foods
Foods Immunology and Microbiology-Microbiology
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
15.40%
发文量
3516
审稿时长
15.83 days
期刊介绍: Foods (ISSN 2304-8158) is an international, peer-reviewed scientific open access journal which provides an advanced forum for studies related to all aspects of food research. It publishes reviews, regular research papers and short communications. Our aim is to encourage scientists, researchers, and other food professionals to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible or share their knowledge with as much readers unlimitedly as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. There are, in addition, unique features of this journal: Ÿ manuscripts regarding research proposals and research ideas will be particularly welcomed Ÿ electronic files or software regarding the full details of the calculation and experimental procedure, if unable to be published in a normal way, can be deposited as supplementary material Ÿ we also accept manuscripts communicating to a broader audience with regard to research projects financed with public funds
×
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