There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.
Abstract
Background
Although modifying diets, by thickening liquids and modifying the texture of foods,
to reduce the risk of aspiration has become central to the current management of dysphagia,
the effectiveness of this intervention has been questioned. This narrative review
examines, and discusses possible reasons for, the apparent discrepancy between the
widespread use of modified diets in current clinical practice and the limited evidence
base regarding the benefits and risks of this approach.
Discussion
There is no good evidence to date that thickening liquids reduces pneumonia in dysphagia
and this intervention may be associated with reduced fluid intake. Texture-modified
foods may contribute to undernutrition in those with dysphagia. Modified diets worsen
the quality of life of those with dysphagia, and non-compliance is common. There is
substantial variability in terminology and standards for modified diets, in the recommendations
of individual therapists, and in the consistency of diets prepared by healthcare staff
for consumption. Although use of modified diets might appear to have a rational pathophysiological
basis in dysphagia, the relationship between aspiration and pneumonia is not clear-cut.
Clinical experience may be a more important determinant of everyday practice than
research evidence and patient preferences. There are situations in the management
of dysphagia where common sense and the necessity of intervention will clearly outweigh
any lack of evidence or when application of evidence-based principles can enable good
decision making despite the absence of robust evidence. Nevertheless, there is a significant
discrepancy between the paucity of the evidence base supporting use of modified diets
and the beliefs and practices of practitioners.
Conclusion
The disconnect between the limited evidence base and the widespread use of modified
diets suggests the need for more careful consideration as to when modified diets might
be recommended to patients. Patients (or their representatives) have a choice whether
or not to accept a modified diet and must receive adequate information, about the
potential risks and impact on quality of life as well as the possible benefits, to
make that choice. There is an urgent need for better quality evidence regarding this
intervention.
Dysphagia is estimated to affect ~8% of the world’s population (~590 million people). Texture-modified foods and thickened drinks are commonly used to reduce the risks of choking and aspiration. The International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) was founded with the goal of developing globally standardized terminology and definitions for texture-modified foods and liquids applicable to individuals with dysphagia of all ages, in all care settings, and all cultures. A multi-professional volunteer committee developed a dysphagia diet framework through systematic review and stakeholder consultation. First, a survey of existing national terminologies and current practice was conducted, receiving 2050 responses from 33 countries. Respondents included individuals with dysphagia; their caregivers; organizations supporting individuals with dysphagia; healthcare professionals; food service providers; researchers; and industry. The results revealed common use of 3–4 levels of food texture (54 different names) and ≥3 levels of liquid thickness (27 different names). Substantial support was expressed for international standardization. Next, a systematic review regarding the impact of food texture and liquid consistency on swallowing was completed. A meeting was then convened to review data from previous phases, and develop a draft framework. A further international stakeholder survey sought feedback to guide framework refinement; 3190 responses were received from 57 countries. The IDDSI Framework (released in November, 2015) involves a continuum of 8 levels (0–7) identified by numbers, text labels, color codes, definitions, and measurement methods. The IDDSI Framework is recommended for implementation throughout the world.
This position document has been developed by the Dysphagia Working Group, a committee of members from the European Society for Swallowing Disorders and the European Union Geriatric Medicine Society, and invited experts. It consists of 12 sections that cover all aspects of clinical management of oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) related to geriatric medicine and discusses prevalence, quality of life, and legal and ethical issues, as well as health economics and social burden. OD constitutes impaired or uncomfortable transit of food or liquids from the oral cavity to the esophagus, and it is included in the World Health Organization’s classification of diseases. It can cause severe complications such as malnutrition, dehydration, respiratory infections, aspiration pneumonia, and increased readmissions, institutionalization, and morbimortality. OD is a prevalent and serious problem among all phenotypes of older patients as oropharyngeal swallow response is impaired in older people and can cause aspiration. Despite its prevalence and severity, OD is still underdiagnosed and untreated in many medical centers. There are several validated clinical and instrumental methods (videofluoroscopy and fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing) to diagnose OD, and treatment is mainly based on compensatory measures, although new treatments to stimulate the oropharyngeal swallow response are under research. OD matches the definition of a geriatric syndrome as it is highly prevalent among older people, is caused by multiple factors, is associated with several comorbidities and poor prognosis, and needs a multidimensional approach to be treated. OD should be given more importance and attention and thus be included in all standard screening protocols, treated, and regularly monitored to prevent its main complications. More research is needed to develop and standardize new treatments and management protocols for older patients with OD, which is a challenging mission for our societies.
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.