Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Objective

An aging population requires increased focus on geriatric otolaryngology. Patients aged ≥65 years are not a homogenous population, and important physiologic differences have been documented among the young-old (65-74 years), middle-old (75-84), and old-old (≥85). We aim to analyze differences in dysphagia diagnoses and swallowing-related quality-of-life among these age subgroups.

Study Design

Retrospective chart review.

Setting

Tertiary care laryngology clinic.

Subjects and Methods

We identified chief complaint, diagnosis, and self-reported swallowing handicap (Eating Assessment Tool [EAT-10] score) of all new patients aged ≥65 years presenting to the Johns Hopkins Voice Center between April 2015 and March 2017. Dysphagia diagnoses were classified by physiologic etiology and anatomic source. Diagnostic categories and EAT-10 score were evaluated as functions of patient age and sex.

Results

Of 839 new patients aged ≥65 years, 109 (13.0%) reported a chief complaint of dysphagia and were included in this study. The most common dysphagia etiologies were neurologic and esophageal. Most common diagnoses were diverticula (15.6%), reflux (13.8%), and radiation induced (8.3%). Diverticula, cricopharyngeal hypertonicity, and radiation-induced changes were associated with higher EAT-10 score (P < .001). Significant differences by sex were found in anatomic source of dysphagia, as men and women were more likely to present with oropharyngeal and esophageal disease, respectively (P = .023). Dysphagia etiology and EAT-10 score were similar across age subgroups.

Conclusion

Important differences among dysphagia diagnosis and EAT-10 score exist among patients aged ≥65 years. Knowledge of these differences may inform diagnostic workup, management, and further investigations in geriatric otolaryngology.

Keywords

dysphagia geriatrics EAT-10

Dysphagia is a symptom of significant concern and impact, with an estimated prevalence of 3% to 4% in the United States.^1,2 A total of $547 million is spent annually on dysphagia-related care in the United States.³ Patients with dysphagia have markedly reduced swallowing-specific and overall health-related quality of life as a result of dietary alterations and impaired social functioning.^4-6

Dysphagia can result from multiple medical disorders, and management is dependent on the localization and physiologic etiology of the underlying disease. Dysphagia can be categorized by anatomic location, including oropharyngeal and esophageal sources, in addition to extrinsic compression of the upper gastrointestinal tract from adjacent masses, musculoskeletal abnormalities, or cardiovascular processes.⁷ Similarly, dysphagia can be characterized by etiology, including neuromuscular and structural causes.⁷ Given this wide characterization, the presentation of dysphagia is variable, ranging from mild discomfort with swallowing to complete inability to tolerate oral intake.^6-8

In particular, dysphagia may be of greater burden on older adults, with an estimated prevalence of 13.8% to 33% in those aged ≥65 years.^9-11 Coupled by the heightened risk of severe consequences in the elderly, including aspiration, dehydration, and malnutrition, it is imperative to understand the etiologies, quality-of-life handicap, and diagnostic evaluation across various age categories of older patients.¹²

With an aging baby boomer population, the country’s health care infrastructure faces a unique challenge in adapting to the needs of a greater volume of older patients. By 2030, the population of older adults will nearly double current totals, with persons aged ≥65 years soon accounting for 20% of the population.¹³ However, it is important to recognize that older adults are not a uniform population. Gerontology literature has highlighted the heterogeneity of older adults, and important physiologic differences have been documented in the young-old (65-74 years), middle old (75-84), and old-old (≥85).^14-16 There has been little work in otolaryngology, however, exploring diagnostic differences and quality-of-life handicap across the geriatric age subgroups and particularly little work concerning dysphagia in this population.

In this study, we aimed to evaluate and describe the clinical features of patients presenting to a tertiary laryngology clinic with a chief complaint of dysphagia. In doing so, we hope to inform more nuanced, patient-based approaches to this increasingly important topic.

Methods

Study Population

A retrospective chart review was conducted for all patients who presented to the Johns Hopkins Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Voice Center over a 2-year period between April 1, 2015, and March 30, 2017. New patients with a chief complaint of dysphagia and age ≥65 years qualified for inclusion. This study received approval from the Johns Hopkins Institutional Review Board.

Variables and Outcomes

Demographic information, underlying diagnosis, imaging and diagnostic study findings, and Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10) scores were abstracted from all eligible charts. Exact patient age at the date of visit was calculated from the date of birth and date of visit and used for assignment to the appropriate age subgroup. Age categorization was in accordance with an existing schema from the emerging literature highlighting the physiologic differences that occur with aging: young-old encompassed those aged 65 to 74 years, middle-old comprised those aged 75 to 84 years, and old-old included individuals aged ≥85 years.^14-16

Underlying diagnosis was retrieved from chart review, and dysphagia assessment was performed as clinically indicated, including some combination of history, physical examination, speech-language pathology assessment, flexible laryngoscopy, and follow-up diagnostic tests, such as videofluoroscopic swallow study (modified barium swallow), esophagram (barium swallow), esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), esophageal manometry, and 24-hour esophageal pH monitoring. For assignment of isolated cervical spine abnormalities as the primary diagnosis, patients must have demonstrated significant arthritic or postsurgical spine changes on imaging in the absence of any other identifiable cause of dysphagia. Understanding that fluoroscopic studies may not always demonstrate reflux, reflux was assigned as the primary diagnosis if the patient had compatible symptoms with either abnormal pH monitoring or symptom resolution with antacid therapy in the absence of any other identifiable cause of dysphagia.¹⁷

Based on a previously described classification schema, dysphagia diagnosis was classified by anatomic location and physiologic etiology.⁷ Classification by anatomic location was defined as disorders of the oropharynx or esophagus or as extrinsic (ie, processes of nongastrointestinal origin) or unknown. Extrinsic pathologies include, but are not limited to, diseases of the spine, thyroid, and cardiovascular structures that may affect swallowing. Classification by etiology was defined as motor, obstructive, or unknown. Motor sources are those of neuromuscular origin and encompass esophageal spasm and dysmotility, cricopharyngeal hypertonicity, radiation-induced fibrosis, reflux, and primary neurologic diseases such as stroke, Parkinson’s disease, or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Obstructive sources are structural lesions and include esophageal diverticulum, stricture, neoplasm, and cervical spine disease.

EAT-10 is a self-administered instrument for documenting dysphagia severity and is routinely completed by patients at the time of the initial clinic visit. EAT-10 is an internally consistent, validated 10-question survey scored from 0 to 40, wherein a score ≥3 is considered abnormal.¹⁸

Statistical Analysis

Primary univariate measures were initially used to describe the overall population, including mean age, sex distribution, etiologies of dysphagia, and mean EAT-10 scores. The population was subdivided by sex and age to assess differences in the proportion of dysphagia etiology. Secondarily, bivariate analysis explored differences in dysphagia etiology or EAT-10 scores between sex and age categories with Pearson’s chi-square or analysis of variance tests. All statistical analyses were conducted with R (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, RStudio version 1.2.5033).

Results

Of 839 new patients aged ≥65 years presenting to the laryngology clinic during the study period, 109 (13.0%) had a chief complaint of dysphagia and are included in this analysis. The remaining 730 had chief complaints of dysphonia (n = 464), cough (n = 89), airway narrowing (n = 50), or other (n = 127) and are not included in further analysis. Of the 109 patients, 61 (56.0%) were male and 48 (44.0%) were female. The study population had a mean (SD) age of 75.4 (7.2) years: 61 (56.0%) were categorized as young-old, 33 (30.3%) as middle-old, and 15 (13.8%) as old-old. Patient characteristics are presented in Table 1 .

Table 1.

Etiology and Anatomic Source of Dysphagia by Age and Sex.^a

		Age group^b				Sex
	Total	Young-old	Middle-old	Old-old	P value	Male	Female	P value
Patients	109	61	33	15		61	48
Etiology
Obstructive	42 (38.5)	25 (41.0)	11 (33.3)	6 (4.0)	.940	22 (36.1)	20 (41.7)	.684
Motor	59 (54.1)	31 (50.8)	19 (57.6)	9 (6.0)		35 (57.4)	24 (50.0)
Unknown	8 (7.4)	5 (8.2)	3 (9.1)	0 (0.0)		4 (6.5)	4 (8.3)
Anatomic source
Esophageal	49 (45.0)	28 (45.9)	12 (36.4)	9 (6.0)	.388	22 (36.1)	27 (56.2)	.023^c
Oropharyngeal	41 (37.6)	20 (32.8)	16 (48.5)	5 (33.3)		31 (50.8)	10 (20.8)
Extrinsic	11 (10.1)	8 (13.1)	2 (6.1)	1 (6.7)		4 (6.5)	7 (14.6)
Unknown	8 (7.3)	5 (8.2)	3 (9.1)	0 (0.0)		4 (6.5)	4 (8.3)
EAT-10, mean (SD)	17.4 (11.5)	17.2 (11.5)	19.9 (12.4)	12.9 (8.1)	.254	17.8 (11.8)	16.9 (11.1)	.756

Abbreviation: EAT-10, Eating Assessment Tool.

Values are presented as No. (%) unless noted otherwise.

Young-old, 65-74 years; middle-old, 75-84; old-old, ≥85.

Statistically significant.

Seventy patients (64.2%) underwent a modified barium or barium swallow as part of the diagnostic workup. Fourteen (12.8%) had an EGD, 6 (5.5%) had manometry, and 3 (2.8%) had esophageal pH sensing. All patients received in-office fiberoptic laryngoscopy. There was no statistically significant difference noted in patients who received videofluoroscopic swallow study, EGD, manometry, or pH sensing by age subgroup (P = .871, .995, .358, .305, respectively) or sex (P = .786, >.99, .110, .158).

In the overall cohort, the most common etiology of dysphagia was motor causes (54.1%). Obstructive causes accounted for 38.5% of cases. The most common anatomic source of dysphagia was esophageal (45.0%), followed by oropharyngeal (37.6%) and extrinsic (10.1%) causes. There was no statistically significant difference noted between age subgroup and dysphagia etiology (P = .940) or anatomic location (P = .388). There was a statistically significant difference noted between sex and anatomic source of dysphagia (P = .023) but not etiology (P = .684). The mean (SD) EAT-10 score was 17.4 (11.5) with no statistically significant difference noted among age subgroups, due to overlapping 95% CIs ( Figure 1 ).

Figure 1.

Mean Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10) score by age and sex. Error bars represent 95% CIs.

The most common causes of oropharyngeal and esophageal dysphagia were of neurologic origin, representing 82.9% and 51.0% of diagnoses, respectively. The most common dysphagia diagnosis in the overall cohort was diverticular disease (15.6%); all but 1 of these were Zenker’s diverticula. This was followed by gastroesophageal and laryngopharyngeal reflux disease (13.8%) and radiation-induced changes (7.3%). The most common diagnoses in this cohort, with their mean EAT-10 scores, are presented in Table 2 . There was a statistically significant difference (P < .001) between specific diagnosis and EAT-10 score, with patients with reflux and esophageal dysmotility reporting less swallowing handicap than patients with cricopharyngeal hypertonicity or radiation fibrosis, who in turn had less quality-of-life handicap than those with a diverticulum.

Table 2.

EAT-10 Score by Most Common Diagnoses.^a

Dysphagia diagnosis	No. (%)	EAT-10, mean (SD)
Diverticular	17 (15.6)	34.2 (6.3)
Reflux	15 (13.8)	5.4 (3.5)
Radiation induced	9 (8.3)	20.1 (10.1)
Esophageal dysmotility	7 (6.4)	5.7 (4.2)
Cricopharyngeal hypertonicity	7 (6.4)	21.7 (6.0)
Cervical spine disease	7 (6.4)	—^b

Abbreviation: EAT-10, Eating Assessment Tool.

There was a statistically significant difference (P < .001) between specific diagnosis and EAT-10 score.

No patient categorized as having cervical spine disease completed the EAT-10.

Discussion

As the elderly represent the fastest-growing segment of our nation’s population, understanding the causes of dysphagia across the age spectrum is important for older adults.¹⁹ This is of particular importance given the increased mortality, morbidity, and adverse social and meal-related functioning in older adults with dysphagia.^12,20,21 In this retrospective review of older adults presenting with dysphagia, we found the most common etiologies were neuromuscular and esophageal in origin. The most common diagnoses were diverticula, reflux-related disease, and radiation-induced fibrosis. Men were more likely to present with oropharyngeal disease and women with esophageal disease. The greatest quality-of-life impact occurred with diverticular disease, cricopharyngeal hypertonicity, and radiation-induced changes.

In our population, 15.6% had dysphagia attributed to diverticular disease; 13.8% to reflux-related disease; 8.3% to postirradiation fibrosis; and 7.3% to cervical spine disease, cricopharyngeal hypertonicity, and esophageal dysmotility disorders. Our patients had a mean EAT-10 score of 17.4. In a similar study of patients presenting to a tertiary swallowing center, 27% had dysphagia due to gastroesophageal reflux disease, and 14% to radiation changes, and 11% to cricopharyngeal dysfunction.²² A similar quality-of-life handicap was demonstrated, with a mean EAT-10 score of 17.7. This reaffirms the most common etiologies of dysphagia among the elderly and the significant social and physiologic handicap on patients.

Our study also demonstrates a significant difference in EAT-10 score by specific dysphagia diagnosis, with diverticulum, postirradiation changes, and cricopharyngeal hypertonicity bearing the greatest impact of swallowing dysfunction. As a widely used, rapidly administered instrument, EAT-10 provides benefit in assessing initial disease severity and treatment response for a variety of dysphagia disorders.^18,23 We found the highest quality-of-life burden to be among patients with diverticula, with a mean (SD) EAT-10 of 34.2 (6.3). Prior studies have demonstrated EAT-10 scores of 17.9 to 22.1 with diverticular disease, which significantly decrease with surgical repair.^24-28 The larger impact of diverticula in this study may be biased, as our institution is a large referral center for endoscopic repair.^29,30 Cricopharyngeal hypertonicity and radiation-induced changes also caused swallowing severity, with mean (SD) EAT-10 scores of 21.7 (6.0) and 20.1 (10.1), respectively. Prior studies have also demonstrated similar swallowing dysfunction with cricopharyngeal dysfunction, which reduce following myotomy or botulinum toxin injection.^31-33 Although intensity-modulated radiotherapy has reduced radiation damage to oropharyngeal structures essential for swallowing, elevated EAT-10 scores remain among these patients, and the long-term prevalence of dysphagia is still 10% to 16%.^34-39 We also noted a statistically significant difference in the anatomic site of dysphagia between men and women. In particular, men were more likely to present with oropharyngeal disease, and women were more likely to have esophageal disease. The oropharyngeal predominance in men likely represents known sex differences in smoking rates and head and neck cancer prevalence.^40-42 The esophageal predominance in women is likely due to the high prevalence of reflux disease in our study (13.8%), which may be influenced by increased gastric secretions, delayed gastric emptying, and increased adiposity accompanying menopause.^41,43,44 Our study did not identify a difference in etiology of dysphagia or EAT-10 scores among the 3 subgroups analyzed (young-old, 65-74 years; middle old, 75-84; and old-old, ≥85), consistent with a prior study analyzing self-perceived dysphagia in these age groups.⁴⁵

Swallowing is a complex process that relies on the successful formation and propulsion of a food bolus; the coordination of the epiglottis, vocal cords, and laryngopharyngeal muscles; and controlled esophageal movement.⁴⁶ Several physiologic changes to swallowing occur in the elderly, including weakened jaw strength and salivary production, pharyngeal and laryngeal muscle atrophy, and loss of esophageal sphincter compliance.⁴⁶ There is evidence, however, to suggest that these physiologic changes seen on fluoroscopy do not alone account for perceived dysphagia or increased risk of aspiration.^47-50 Rather, perceived and diagnosed swallowing dysfunction may be the result of underlying disease. A complaint of dysphagia in older adults should therefore be regarded as pathologic, especially given the wide spectrum of neuromuscular and structural disorders that increase in prevalence with age.^20,45,46,51

This study is not without limitations. This study consists of chart review, and data were limited to what was documented in the electronical medical record. Similarly, dysphagia etiology was determined by clinical judgment, as supported by imaging studies and diagnostic studies, which may introduce selection bias. Our cohort also represents a treatment-seeking population; therefore, results may not be generalizable to all older adults with dysphagia. Likewise, dysphagia cases that present to an otolaryngology clinic may not represent all treatment-seeking patients with dysphagia, particularly those whose workup may be initiated by neurologists, gastroenterologists, or other specialists. Last, while our clinic is a busy referral center for laryngological conditions, our patients with a chief complaint of dysphagia still comprised only 13.0% of all new patients over a 2-year period, and only 15 patients were in the old-old subgroup. A larger data set, by either a longer study period or multi-institution data collection, may have yielded more robust analysis.

This article is a descriptive analysis of dysphagia among the elderly, also subdivided by young-old, middle-old, and old-old age categories. This study adds to the growing literature highlighting the causes and quality-of-life impact of dysphagia in older adults, which may have future implication for how these individuals are evaluated and treated.

Conclusion

As the proportion of elderly people in the United States rises, so will the number of patients with swallowing complaints. The most common causes of dysphagia among an elderly population presenting to a tertiary care swallowing center were neurologic and esophageal in nature, with the top causes comprising diverticula, reflux, and postirradiative changes. These etiologies also result in significant quality-of-life burden, thereby pointing to the need for further research in the evaluation and treatment of dysphagia in older age.

Author Contributions

Jeremy Applebaum, study design, data acquisition, data analysis, data interpretation, article drafting, final approval, accountability for the work; Emerson Lee, data analysis, article drafting, final approval, accountability for the work; Aisha Harun, study design, data acquisition, article revision, final approval, accountability for the work; Ashley Davis, data acquisition, article revision, final approval, accountability for the work; Alexander T. Hillel, data acquisition, article revision, final approval, accountability for the work; Simon R. Best, data acquisition, article revision, final approval, accountability for the work; Lee M. Akst, study design, data acquisition, article revision, final approval, accountability for the work.

Disclosures

Competing interests: Alexander T. Hillel is a consultant for Ambu Inc.

Sponsorships: None.

Funding source: None.

References

Skoretz

Flowers

Martino

. The incidence of dysphagia following endotracheal intubation a systematic review. Chest. 2010;137(3):665-673. doi:10.1378/chest.09-1823

Cho

Choung

Saito

, et al. Prevalence and risk factors for dysphagia: a USA community study. Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2015;27(2):212-219. doi:10.1111/nmo.12467

Cichero

. Definition, prevalence and burden of oropharyngeal dysphagia: a serious problem among older adults worldwide and the impact on prognosis and hospital resources. Nestle Nutr Inst Workshop Ser. 2012;72:1-11.

Jones

Speyer

Kertscher

Denman

Swan

Cordier

. Health-related quality of life and oropharyngeal dysphagia: a systematic review. Dysphagia. 2018;33(2):141-172. doi:10.1007/s00455-017-9844-9

Park

Han

, et al. Prevalence and associated factors of dysphagia in nursing home residents. Geriatr Nurs (Minneap). 2013;34(3):212-217. doi:10.1016/j.gerinurse.2013.02.014

Swan

Speyer

Heijnen

Wagg

Cordier

. Living with oropharyngeal dysphagia: effects of bolus modification on health-related quality of life—a systematic review. Qual Life Res. 2015;24(10):2447-2456. doi:10.1007/s11136-015-0990-y

Wolf

. Dysphagia. In: Walker

Hall

Hurst

, eds. Clinical Methods: The History, Physical, and Laboratory Examinations. 3rd ed. Butterworths; 1990:430-433.

Kaindlstorfer

. An appraisal of current dysphagia diagnosis and treatment strategies. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;10(8):929-942.

Kawashima

Motohashi

Fujishima

. Prevalence of dysphagia among community-dwelling elderly individuals as estimated using a questionnaire for dysphagia screening. Dysphagia. 2004;19(4):266-271. doi:10.1007/s00455-004-0013-6

10.

Chen

Golub

Hapner

Johns

. Prevalence of perceived dysphagia and quality-of-life impairment in a geriatric population. Dysphagia. 2009;24(1):1-6. doi:10.1007/s00455-008-9156-1

11.

Roy

Stemple

Merrill

Thomas

. Dysphagia in the elderly: preliminary evidence of prevalence, risk factors, and socioemotional effects. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2007;116(11):858-865. doi:10.1177/000348940711601112

12.

Van der Maarel-Wierink

Meijers

JMM

De Visschere

LMJ

de Baat

Halfens

RJG

Schols

JMGA

. Subjective dysphagia in older care home residents: a cross-sectional, multi-centre point prevalence measurement. Int J Nurs Stud. 2014;51(6):875-881. doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2013.10.016

13.

US Census Bureau. Fueled by aging baby boomers, nation’s older population to nearly double in the next 20 years, Census Bureau reports. Published 2014. Accessed February 4, 2020. https://www-census-gov.proxy1.library.jhu.edu/newsroom/press-releases/2014/cb14-84.html

14.

Chuang

Huang

Lee

, et al. The differences of metabolic syndrome in elderly subgroups: a special focus on young-old, old-old and oldest old. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2016;65:92-97. doi:10.1016/j.archger.2016.03.008

15.

Cohen-Mansfield

Shmotkin

Blumstein

Shorek

Eyal

Hazan

. The old, old-old, and the oldest old: continuation or distinct categories? An examination of the relationship between age and changes in health, function, and wellbeing. Int J Aging Hum Dev. 2013;77(1):37-57. doi:10.2190/AG.77.1.c

16.

Applebaum

Harun

Davis

Hillel

Best

SRA

Akst

. Geriatric dysphonia: characteristics of diagnoses in age-based cohorts in a tertiary voice clinic. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2019;128(5):384-390. doi:10.1177/0003489419826133

17.

Kopec

Ferrucci

. The sensitivity and specificity of barium swallow in diagnosing gastroesophageal reflux in patients with chronic cough. Chest. 2013;144(4):525A.

18.

Belafsky

Mouadeb

Rees

, et al. Validity and reliability of the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10). Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2008;117(12):919-924.

19.

US Census Bureau. 2010 census shows 65 and older population growing faster than total US population. Published November 30, 2011. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/2010_census/cb11-cn192.html

20.

Payne

Morley

. Dysphagia: a new geriatric syndrome. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017;18(7):555-557.

21.

Lancaster

. Dysphagia: its nature, assessment and management. Br J Community Nurs. 2014;25(5):238-238. doi:10.12968/pnur.2014.25.5.238

22.

Hoy

Domer

Plowman

Loch

Belafsky

. Causes of dysphagia in a tertiary-care swallowing center. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2013;122(5):335-338. doi:10.1177/000348941312200508

23.

Hansen

Kjaersgaard

. Item analysis of the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10) by the Rasch model: a secondary analysis of cross-sectional survey data obtained among community-dwelling elders. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020;18(1):139.

24.

Venkatesan

Evangelista

Kuhn

Belafsky

. Normal fluoroscopic appearance status post-successful endoscopic Zenker diverticulotomy. Laryngoscope. 2017;127(8):1762-1766. doi:10.1002/lary.26446

25.

Bommakanti

Moss

Weisman

Weissbrod

. Zenker’s diverticulotomy with bipolar tissue sealer: retrospective review of safety and short-term outcomes. Am J Otolaryngol Head Neck Med Surg. 2020;41(1):102325. doi:10.1016/j.amjoto.2019.102325

26.

Junlapan

Abu-Ghanem

Sung

Damrose

. Outcomes in modified transoral resection of diverticula for Zenker’s diverticulum. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2019;276(5):1423-1429. doi:10.1007/s00405-019-05374-z

27.

Schoeff

Freeman

Daniero

. Voice outcomes in surgical repair of Zenker’s diverticulum. Dysphagia. 2017;32(5):678-682. doi:10.1007/s00455-017-9813-3

28.

Van Abel

Tombers

Krein

, et al. Short-term quality-of-life outcomes following transoral diverticulotomy for Zenker’s diverticulum. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;154(2):322-327. doi:10.1177/0194599815616078

29.

Law

Katzka

Baron

. Zenker’s diverticulum. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;12(11):1773-1782. doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2013.09.016

30.

Wilson

Pryde

Allan

Maran

AGD

. Cricopharyngeal dysfunction. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1992;106(2):163-168. doi:10.1177/019459989210600218

31.

Kelly

Koszewski

Jaradeh

Merati

Blumin

Bock

. Botulinum toxin injection for the treatment of upper esophageal sphincter dysfunction. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2013;122(2):100-108. doi:10.1038/jid.2014.371

32.

Jiang

Sung

Damrose

. Improvement in the reflux symptom index following surgery for cricopharyngeal dysfunction. J Voice. 2017;31(1):86-89. doi:10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.02.006

33.

Allen

Blair

Miles

. Assessment of videofluoroscopic swallow study findings before and after cricopharyngeal myotomy. Head Neck. 2017;39(9):1869-1875. doi:10.1002/hed.24846

34.

Ursino

Cocuzza

Seccia

, et al. Pattern of dysphagia after swallowing-sparing intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) of head and neck cancers: results of a mono-institutional prospective study. Strahlentherapie und Onkol. 2018;194(12):1114-1123. doi:10.1007/s00066-018-1328-9

35.

Petkar

Bhide

Newbold

Harrington

Nutting

. Dysphagia-optimised intensity-modulated radiotherapy techniques in pharyngeal cancers: is anyone going to swallow it? Clin Oncol. 2017;29(7):e110-e118. doi:10.1016/j.clon.2017.02.002

36.

Peponi

Glanzmann

Willi

Huber

Studer

. Dysphagia in head and neck cancer patients following intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Radiat Oncol. 2011;6(1):2-9. doi:10.1186/1748-717X-6-1

37.

Wang

Amdur

Mendenhall

, et al. Impact of post-chemoradiotherapy superselective/selective neck dissection on patient reported quality of life. Oral Oncol. 2016;58:21-26. doi:10.1016/j.oraloncology.2016.04.015

38.

Soldatova

Mirza

. Long-term voice and swallowing outcomes for oral and oropharyngeal cancer following primary or adjuvant chemoradiation. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2019;128(9):802-810. doi:10.1177/0003489419842256

39.

Nuchit

Lam-ubol

Paemuang

, et al. Alleviation of dry mouth by saliva substitutes improved swallowing ability and clinical nutritional status of post-radiotherapy head and neck cancer patients: a randomized controlled trial. Support Care Cancer. 2020;28(6):2817-2828. doi:10.1007/s00520-019-05132-1

40.

Jemal

Siegel

Ward

Murray

Thun

. Cancer statistics, 2007. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007;57(1):43-66.

41.

Kim

. Sex and gender differences in gastroesophageal reflux disease. J Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2016;22(4):575-588. doi:10.5056/jnm16138

42.

Ashare

Wetherill

. The intersection of sex differences, tobacco use, and inflammation: implications for psychiatric disorders. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2018;20(9):75. doi:10.1007/s11920-018-0946-3

43.

Lurati

. Effects of menopause on appetite and the gastrointestinal system. Nurs Womens Health. 2018;22(6):499-505. doi:10.1016/j.nwh.2018.09.004

44.

Kim

Jung

Lim

, et al. Gender specific differences in prevalence and risk factors for gastro-esophageal reflux disease. J Korean Med Sci. 2019;34(21):1-15. doi:10.3346/jkms.2019.34.e158

45.

Jardine

Miles

Allen

. Self-reported swallowing and nutrition status in community-living older adults. Dysphagia. Published online May 8, 2020. doi:10.1007/s00455-020-10125-y

46.

Khan

Carmona

Traube

. Dysphagia in the elderly. Clin Geriatr Med. 2014;30(1):43-53. doi:10.1016/j.cger.2013.10.009

47.

Molfenter

Brates

Herzberg

Noorani

Lazarus

. The swallowing profile of healthy aging adults: comparing noninvasive swallow tests to videofluoroscopic measures of safety and efficiency. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2018;61(7):1603-1612.

48.

Yin

Jardine

Miles

Allen

. What is a normal pharynx? A videofluoroscopic study of anatomy in older adults. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2018;275(9):2317-2323. doi:10.1007/s00405-018-5057-6

49.

Jardine

Miles

Allen

. Swallowing function in advanced age. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018;26(6):367-374. doi:10.1097/MOO.0000000000000485

50.

Jardine

Miles

Allen

. Dysphagia onset in older adults during unrelated hospital admission: Quantitative videofluoroscopic measures. Geriatrics (Basel). 2018;3(4):66. doi:10.3390/geriatrics3040066

51.

Jardine

Miles

Allen

. A systematic review of physiological changes in swallowing in the oldest old. Dysphagia. 2019;35(3):509-532. doi:10.1007/s00455-019-10056-3

Characterization of Geriatric Dysphagia Diagnoses in Age-Based Cohorts

Abstract

Objective

Study Design

Setting

Subjects and Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keywords

Methods

Study Population

Variables and Outcomes

Statistical Analysis

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Author Contributions

Disclosures

References