AIM: To investigate the effectiveness of head compensatory postures to ensure safe oropharyngeal transit. METHODS: A total of 321 dysphagia patients were enrolled and assessed with videofluoromanometry (VFM). The dysp...AIM: To investigate the effectiveness of head compensatory postures to ensure safe oropharyngeal transit. METHODS: A total of 321 dysphagia patients were enrolled and assessed with videofluoromanometry (VFM). The dysphagia patients were classified as follows: safe transit; penetration without aspiration; aspiration before, during or after swallowing; multiple aspirations and no transit. The patients with aspiration or no transit were tested with VFM to determine whether compensatory postures could correct their swallowing disorder. RESULTS: VFM revealed penetration without aspiration in 71 patients (22.1%); aspiration before swallowing in 17 patients (5.3%); aspiration during swallowing in 32 patients (10%); aspiration after swallowing in 21 patients (6.5%); multiple aspirations in six patients (1.9%); no transit in five patients (1.6%); and safe transit in 169 patients (52.6%). Compensatory postures guaranteed a safe transit in 66/75 (88%) patients with aspiration or no transit. A chin-down posture achieved a safe swallow in 42/75 (56%) patients, a head-turned posture in 19/75 (25.3%) and a hyperextended head posture in 5/75 (6.7%). The compensatory postures were not effective in 9/75 (12%) cases. CONCLUSION: VFM allows the speech-language therapist to choose the most effective compensatory posture without a trial-and-error process and check the effectiveness of the posture.展开更多
文摘AIM: To investigate the effectiveness of head compensatory postures to ensure safe oropharyngeal transit. METHODS: A total of 321 dysphagia patients were enrolled and assessed with videofluoromanometry (VFM). The dysphagia patients were classified as follows: safe transit; penetration without aspiration; aspiration before, during or after swallowing; multiple aspirations and no transit. The patients with aspiration or no transit were tested with VFM to determine whether compensatory postures could correct their swallowing disorder. RESULTS: VFM revealed penetration without aspiration in 71 patients (22.1%); aspiration before swallowing in 17 patients (5.3%); aspiration during swallowing in 32 patients (10%); aspiration after swallowing in 21 patients (6.5%); multiple aspirations in six patients (1.9%); no transit in five patients (1.6%); and safe transit in 169 patients (52.6%). Compensatory postures guaranteed a safe transit in 66/75 (88%) patients with aspiration or no transit. A chin-down posture achieved a safe swallow in 42/75 (56%) patients, a head-turned posture in 19/75 (25.3%) and a hyperextended head posture in 5/75 (6.7%). The compensatory postures were not effective in 9/75 (12%) cases. CONCLUSION: VFM allows the speech-language therapist to choose the most effective compensatory posture without a trial-and-error process and check the effectiveness of the posture.
