...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The Laryngoscope: A Medical Journal for Clinical and Research Contributions in Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Medicine and Surgery, Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery .. >Patient-controlled comparison of flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing with sensory testing (FEESST) and videofluoroscopy.
【24h】

Patient-controlled comparison of flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing with sensory testing (FEESST) and videofluoroscopy.

机译：病人对照的吞咽与感觉测试（FEESST）和视频荧光透视的柔性内窥镜评估的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the results of videofluoroscopy (VFS) with flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing with sensory testing (FEESST) in dysphagia testing. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective review of data collected over a 4-year period at a tertiary care medical center. The FEESST and VFS results for patients receiving both examinations within a 2-week period were compared with respect to swallowing function. Comparisons were categorized as full agreement, minor disagreement that would not result in a significant difference in diet recommendations, and major disagreement that would result in a significant difference in diet recommendations. Kappa with quadratic weighting was calculated to evaluate the inter-test agreement. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients met inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Forty-one percent of patients were not eating by mouth at the time of FEESST and the mean interval between the two examinations was 5 days. Laryngeal examination revealed edema/erythema in 93%, impaired pharyngeal squeeze in 66%, decreased laryngopharyngeal sensation in 82%, and absent laryngeal adductor reflex in 30%. FEESST with all consistencies revealed pooling in 89%, penetration in 83%, and aspiration in 65% of patients. VFS revealed pooling in 65%, penetration in 67%, and aspiration in 54% of patients. Comparison of FEESST and VFS revealed full agreement in 52%, minor disagreement in 13%, and major disagreement in 35% of patients. A weighted kappa value of 0.324 signified only "fair" agreement between the two tests. CONCLUSIONS: FEESST and VFS may not represent comparable tests of dysphagia. Further comparative studies of tests of swallowing function are required to determine the ideal approach to dysphagia testing.
机译：目的：本研究的目的是将吞咽困难吞咽检查中的视频透视检查（VFS）与内窥镜下吞咽感觉检查（FEESST）的灵活内镜评估结果进行比较。方法：作者对三级医疗中心在4年期间收集的数据进行了回顾性审查。比较了2周内接受两次检查的患者的吞咽功能的FEESST和VFS结果。比较分为完全同意，轻微分歧（不会导致饮食建议有显着差异）和重大分歧（导致饮食建议有显着差异）。计算具有二次加权的Kappa，以评估测试间的一致性。结果：54例患者符合纳入标准并接受了检查。在FEESST时，有41％的患者没有通过口进食，两次检查之间的平均间隔为5天。喉部检查发现水肿/红斑为93％，咽挤压受损为66％，喉咽感觉降低为82％，而喉内收肌反射消失为30％。具有所有一致性的FEESST显示，合并的患者占89％，穿透的占83％，抽吸的占65％。 VFS显示有65％的患者合并，67％的渗透率和54％的患者抽吸。 FEESST和VFS的比较显示，完全同意率为52％，轻微分歧为13％，重大分歧为35％。加权kappa值为0.324仅表示两次测试之间的“公平”协议。结论：FEESST和VFS可能不能代表吞咽困难的类似测试。需要进一步的吞咽功能测试比较研究，以确定吞咽困难测试的理想方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号