↓ Skip to main content

Pharyngeal Pressure and Timing During Bolus Transit

Overview of attention for article published in Dysphagia, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
Title
Pharyngeal Pressure and Timing During Bolus Transit
Published in
Dysphagia, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00455-016-9743-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chelsea C. Walczak, Corinne A. Jones, Timothy M. McCulloch

Abstract

Determining intrabolus pressure (IBP) at the upper esophageal sphincter (UES) and in the esophagus has given compelling evidence that IBP can be a predictor for swallowing dysfunction. Studies have looked most superiorly at the low hypopharynx region but there has been no inquiry into what IBP measures throughout the entire pharynx can tell us. We present a study to describe the pressures within and surrounding the moving bolus throughout the pharynx and into the UES. Simultaneous high-resolution manometry (HRM) and videofluoroscopy were performed in ten healthy subjects swallowing ten 10 mL thin-liquid barium boluses. Three events surrounding bolus movement were tracked via videofluoroscopy, and two additional events were found using manometric measures. As the bolus passes through the pharynx, low pressure is created at and below the head of the bolus. A modest pressure increase is seen as the bolus passes through the pharynx, and finally, high pressure is observed at the bolus tail, followed by an even larger pressure generation of a clearance event. HRM allows for greater resolution in data collection in the pharynx and in this study, aided in identifying semi-unique characteristics around the hypopharynx and the UES which are consistent with the complex anatomy of the regions and the transition of the UES from active closure to relaxed opening. In the future, additional studies designed to look at aged and diseased populations may lead to better understanding of disease etiology, and treatment options.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Other 6 11%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Master 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 17 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 17%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Neuroscience 1 2%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 20 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 September 2016.
All research outputs
#16,469,408
of 25,019,915 outputs
Outputs from Dysphagia
#1,048
of 1,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,882
of 346,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dysphagia
#19
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,019,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,360 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 346,847 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.