kristen k maul, elizabeth e galletta, peii chen, mooyeon oh-park, yekyung kong, kelsea sandefur, am...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Association of Spatial Neglect & Eating and Swallowing
Function post Stroke
Kristen K Maul, Elizabeth E Galletta, Peii Chen, Mooyeon Oh-Park, Yekyung Kong, Kelsea Sandefur,
AM Barrett
AAPMR Annual Meeting 2014
2
DisclosureKristen K Maul
Elizabeth E Galletta
Peii Chen
Mooyeon Oh-Park
Yekyung Kong
Kelsea Sandefur
And AM Barrett
have no relevant financial disclosures.
Eating is a complex behaviorVolitional - Oral stage.
Mastication, manipulation and transit of the bolus.Reflexive - Pharyngeal stage.
Initiation of patterned response.Epiglottic inversion.Laryngeal elevation.Upper esophageal sphincter opening. Bolus transit through pharynx into esophagus.
CognitiveBody spatial cognition
3
Logemann, 1995; Leopold and Daniels, 2010
4
Spatial neglect and eating activity
Spatial neglect & swallowing deficits common post stroke (Flowers, 2013)
Neglect - inattention to left-side affects eating behaviors and patterns may affect volitional stage of swallowing (Andre, 2000)Failure to initiate chewing/swallowing on left side of mouth.Dribbling on the left side of the face.Food retention in the oral cavity.
Neglect may not affect reflexive stage of swallowing and aspiration (Steinhagen et al., 2009)
5
Objective of the study is toEvaluate whether the presence of spatial neglect
has an impact on oral phase of swallowing function and eating independence.
6
MethodsDesign: Retrospective analysis of Medical RecordSetting: Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility 06/12- 06/13Inclusion:
First time unilateral hemispheric stroke (L or R) being evaluated for spatial neglect
Exclusion:Bilateral lesionsPrevious CVA
7
MethodsPredictor variable: Severity of neglect
Catherine Bergego Scale (CBS score via Kessler Foundation-NAP)
Outcome measuresPresence and Type of dysphagia on clinical examination
(oral, pharyngeal, oral-pharyngeal)FIM - eating score
8
RESULTS
Demographics & Functional Status (n=82)
Characteristics No Neglect, n = 24 Neglect, n = 58 P value
Age - yrs (sd) 70.5 (16.2) 70.3 (13.3) .958
Female (%) 13 (54.2) 34 (58.6) .711
Rt Stroke (%) 11 (45.8) 48 (82.8) < .001
Days post-onset (sd) 8.8 (5.0) 8.7 (4.7) .971
CBS (sd) 0 10.5 (8.5) N/A
9
10
ResultsDysphagia Dx (type) No Neglect,
n=24Neglect,
n=58P value
Dysphagia, any phase (%) 14 (58.3) 41 (70.1) .279
Oral phase (%) 1 (0.1) 13 (22.4)
.015 Pharyngeal phase (%) 4 (28.6) 1(.02)
Oro-pharyngeal phase (%) 9 (64.3) 27 (46.6)
NDD = National Diet Level (solids)
11
Impairment in Oral Stage
Swallowing impairment (%) No Neglect n=14 Neglect n=41
Tongue retraction 2 (14) 8 (20)Tongue pumping 0 1 (2)Extended mastication 2 (14) 14 (34)Premature spillage 2 (14) 10 (24)Anterior leakage 1 (7) 9 (22)Bolus formation 0 7 (17)Bolus propulsion time 0 10 (24)Oral residue 1 (7) 8 (20)Rotary chew 0 5 (12)Piecemeal degluttition 1 (7) 3 (7)Apraxic component 1 (7) 3 (7)Awareness of bolus 0 1 (2)
12
Multivariate Logistic Regression
OR (95% Confidence Interval) P value
CBS Score 1.15 (1.05 - 1.26) <.001
Age 0.99 (0.96 - 1.03) .648
Sex (F) 2.99 (1.00 - 8.93) .050
Right Stroke 0.30 (0.09 - 1.03) .065
Neglect predicts diagnosis of dysphagia, controlling for age, sex, & stroke side
13
Eating FIM score by Neglect Severity
Mild Moderate Severe0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Severity of Neglect
FIM
Ea
tin
g S
co
re
14
SummaryIn a sample of 82 first-time stroke survivors,
individuals with spatial neglect were more-likely to have oral dysphagia
Spatial neglect is associated with greater dependence in eating.
Interdisciplinary communication is required in treatment of patients with dysphagia and spatial neglect.
15
Future DirectionsRelationship between the type of neglect (personal
neglect vs extrapersonal neglect) and the oral phase dysphagia
Prospective study of oral phase swallowing difficulties to distinguish stroke severity and neglectto assess the morbidity in neglect associated dysphagia
Demographics & Functional Status (n=82)
Characteristics No Neglect, n = 24 Neglect, n = 58 P value
Days post-onset (sd) 8.8 (5.0) 8.7 (4.7) .971
Total FIM-admit (sd) 82.8 (17.1) 57.8 (16.6) < .001
Cog FIM-admit (sd) 26.1 (5.8) 22.1 (2.9) < .001
Motor FIM-admit (sd) 56.7 (13.6) 35.8 (13.5) < .002
CBS (sd) 0 10.5 (8.5) N/A
16
17
ResultsDysphagia Dx (type) No Neglect,
n=24Neglect,
n=58P value
Dysphagia, any phase (%) 14 (58.3) 41 (70.1) .279
Oral phase (%) 1 (0.1) 13 (22.4)
.015 Pharyngeal phase (%) 4 (28.6) 1(.02)
Oro-pharyngeal phase (%) 9 (64.3) 27 (46.6)
NDD 1 2 11
NDD 2 4 7
NDD 3 3 11
NDD 4 11 15
NDD = National Diet Level (solids)
18
Impairment in Pharyngeal Stage
Swallowing impairment No Neglect n=14 Neglect n=41
Delayed swallow Initiation 1 (7%) 12 (29%)
Pharyngeal constriction 1 (7%) 7 (17%)
Vallecular pooling 2 (14%) 10 (24%)
Pyriform pooling prior to the swallow 1 (7%) 11 (26%)
Penetration 2 (14%) 13 (32%)
Silent aspiration 1 (7%) 5 (12%)
Pharyngeal transit time 0 3 (7%)
Pharyngeal residue 1 (7%) 2 (5%)
Sensory integrity 0 3 (7%)
Hyolaryngeal elevation 1 (7%) 8 (20%)
Epiglottic retroflexion 0 3 (7%)
No difference in Pyriform /Valllecular residue, aspiration, reduced tongue base retraction
19
ReferencesAndré, J. M., Beis, J. M., Morin, N., & Paysant, J. (2000). Buccal
hemineglect.Archives of neurology, 57(12), 1734-1741.
Flowers, H. L., Silver, F. L., Fang, J., Rochon, E., & Martino, R. (2013). The incidence, co-occurrence, and predictors of dysphagia, dysarthria, and aphasia after first-ever acute ischemic stroke. Journal of communication disorders,46(3), 238-248.
Logemann, J. A., & Logemann, J. A. (1997). Evaluation and treatment of swallowing disorders. 2nd Edition, Pro Ed: Austin, TZ.
Leopold, N. A., & Daniels, S. K. (2010). Supranuclear control of swallowing.Dysphagia, 25(3), 250-257.
Steinhagen, V., Grossmann, A., Benecke, R., & Walter, U. (2009). Swallowing disturbance pattern relates to brain lesion location in acute stroke patients.Stroke, 40(5), 1903-1906.