Evidence Hub

Effect of a texture-modified and controlled bolus volume diet on all-cause mortality in older persons with oropharyngeal dysphagia: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial

C. A. Reyes-Torres, L. Castillo-Martínez, A. G. Ramos-Vázquez, L. Cassis-Nosthas, M. Zavala-Solares, Guadalupe García-de-la-Torre, A. Serralde-Zúñiga

Nutrition in clinical practice, 2023

127 participants · 5 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) is common among older adults. Some studies have evaluated the efficacy of a texture-modified diet on mortality but with short-term follow-up. We aimed to evaluate the effect of a texture-modified diet and controlled bolus volume on all-cause mortality after 12 months in older persons with OD.

METHODS

This secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial included patients aged ≥60 years with a diagnosis of OD. They were concurrently and randomly assigned to receive either a texture-modified food diet and controlled bolus volume (intervention group) or standard treatment (control group) with 12 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes were oral intake, weight, handgrip strength, phase angle, and aspiration pneumonia. Kaplan-Meier analysis and the Cox proportional hazards model were used for mortality analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 127 participants (intervention group: 64 and control group: 63) were recruited, with a mean age of 76 years. The probability of all-cause mortality was significantly lower in the intervention group (n = 8, 12%) than in the control group (n = 18, 29%) (hazard ratio = 0.36 [95% CI = 0.16-0.86]; P = 0.01). There were 5 (7.9%) and 10 (16.1%) aspiration pneumonia events in the intervention and control groups, respectively (not significant) in 12 months of follow-up. Changes were observed in protein consumption (P = 0.01), body weight (P = 0.04), body mass index (P = 0.004), handgrip strength (P = 0.02), and phase…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 127 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free