4.3 Article

The Ability of the Eating Assessment Tool-10 to Detect Aspiration in Patients With Neurological Disorders

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROGASTROENTEROLOGY AND MOTILITY
Volume 23, Issue 4, Pages 550-554

Publisher

KOREAN SOC NEUROGASTROENTEROLOGY & MOTILITY
DOI: 10.5056/jnm16165

Keywords

Aspiration; Deglutition; Deglutition disorders; Dysphagia; Screen

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background/Aims Dysphagia is common in patients with neurological disorders. There is a need to identify patients at risk early by a useful clinical tool to prevent its serious complications. The study aims to determine the ability of the Turkish version of Eating Assessment Tool-10 (T-EAT-10) to detect aspiration in patients with neurological disorders. Methods Two hundred fifty-nine patients with neurological disorders who had complaints about swallowing difficulty and referred for a swallowing evaluation were included. Oropharyngeal dysphagia was evaluated with the T-EAT-10 and videofluoroscopic swallowing study in the same day. The penetration-aspiration scale (PAS) was used to document the penetration and aspiration severity. Results The mean age of the patients was 59.72 +/- 17.24 years (minimum [min] = 18, maximum [max] = 96), of which 57.1% were male. The mean T-EAT-10 of patients who had aspiration (PAS > 5) was 25.91 +/- 10.31 (min = 1, max = 40) and the mean T-EAT-10 of patients who did not have aspiration (PAS < 6) was 15.70 +/- 10.54 (min = 0, max = 40) (P < 0.001). Patients with a T-EAT-10 score higher than 15 were 2.4 times more likely to aspirate. A linear correlation was found between T-EAT-10 and PAS scores of the patients (r = 0.416, P < 0.001). The sensitivity of a T-EAT-10 higher than 15 in detecting aspiration was 81.0% and the specificity was 58.0%. A T-EAT-10 score of higher than 15 has a positive predictive value of 72.0% and a negative predictive value of 69.0%. Conclusion The T-EAT-10 can be used to detect unsafe airway protection in neurology clinics to identify and refer dysphagic patients for further evaluation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available