OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to critically evaluate the efficacy of electrical stimulation (ES) in treating persons with dysphagia and aspiration.
STUDY DESIGN: Nonconcurrent cohort study.
METHODOLOGY: The charts of 40 consecutive individuals undergoing ES and 40 consecutive persons undergoing traditional dysphagia therapy (TDT) were reviewed. Pre- and post-therapy treatment success was compared utilizing a previously described swallow severity scale. A linear regression analysis was employed to adjust for potential confounding variables.
RESULTS: The swallow severity scale improved from 0.50 to 1.48 in the TDT group (P < 0.05) and from 0.28 to 3.23 in the ES group (P < 0.001). After adjusting for potential confounding factors, persons receiving ES did significantly better in regard to improvement in their swallowing function than persons receiving TDT (P = 0.003).
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this nonconcurrent cohort study suggest that dysphagia therapy with transcutaneous electrical stimulation is superior to traditional dysphagia therapy alone in individuals in a long-term acute care facility.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BelloJ, editor. Prevalence of speech, voice, and language disorders in the United States. Communication Facts, 1994. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association: 1–4.
2.
NeumannSBartolomeGBuchholzD, et al. Swallowing therapy of neurologic patients: correlation of outcome with pretreatment variables and therapeutic methods. Dysphagia1995;10(1):1–5.
3.
ParkCLO'NeillPAMartinDF.A pilot exploratory study of oral electrical stimulation on swallow function following stroke: an innovative technique. Dysphagia199712(3):161–6.
4.
FreedMLFreedLChatburnRL, et al. Electrical stimulation for swallowing disorders caused by stroke. Respir Care2001 May;46(5): 466–74.
5.
LeelamanitVLimsakulCGeaterA.Synchronized electrical stimulation in treating pharyngeal dysphagia. Laryngoscope2002 Dec; 112(12):2204–10.
6.
WagnerDPDraperEAAbizandaCampos R, et al. Initial international use of APACHE. An acute severity of disease measure. Med Decis Making1984; 4(3):297–313.
7.
PeuralaSHPitkaneneKSiveniusJ, et al. Cutaneous electrical stimulation may enhance sensorimotor recovery in chronic stroke. Clin Rehabil2002 Nov; 16(7):709–16.
8.
de KroonJRvan der LeeJHIJzermanMJ, et al. Therapeutic electrical stimulation to improve motor control and functional abilities of the upper extremity after stroke: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil2002 Jun;16(4):350–60.
9.
GordonTMaoJ.Muscle atrophy and procedures for training after spinal cord injury. Phys Ther1994;74(1):50–60.
10.
MohrTMAkersTKWessmanJC.Effects of high voltage stimulation on blood flow in the rat hind limb. Phys Ther1987;67:526–33.
11.
Snyder-MackerLDelittoABaileySL, et al. Strength of the quadriceps femoris muscle and functional recovery after reconstruction of the ACL. J Bone Joint Surg Am1995;77:1166–73.
12.
SinacoreDRDelittoAKingDS, et al. Type II fiber activation with electrical stimulation. Phys Ther1990;70:416–22.
13.
SmithGVAlonGRoysSR, et al. Functional MRI determination of a dose-response relationship to lower extremity neuromuscular electrical stimulation in healthy subjects. Exp Brain Res2003 May;150(1): 33–9. Epub 2003 Mar 27.
14.
KimberleyTJLewisSMAuerbachEJ, et al. Electrical stimulation driving functional improvements and cortical changes in subjects with stroke. Exp Brain Res2004 Feb;154(4):450–60. Epub 2003 Nov 15.
