↓ Skip to main content

Improving Post-Stroke Dysphagia Outcomes Through a Standardized and Multidisciplinary Protocol: An Exploratory Cohort Study

Overview of attention for article published in Dysphagia, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 Mendeley
Title
Improving Post-Stroke Dysphagia Outcomes Through a Standardized and Multidisciplinary Protocol: An Exploratory Cohort Study
Published in
Dysphagia, August 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00455-014-9565-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marialuisa Gandolfi, Nicola Smania, Giulia Bisoffi, Teresa Squaquara, Paola Zuccher, Sara Mazzucco

Abstract

Stroke is a major cause of dysphagia. Few studies to date have reported on standardized multidisciplinary protocolized approaches to the management of post-stroke dysphagia. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate the impact of a standardized multidisciplinary protocol on clinical outcomes in patients with post-stroke dysphagia. We performed retrospective chart reviews of patients with post-stroke dysphagia admitted to the neurological ward of Verona University Hospital from 2004 to 2008. Outcomes after usual treatment for dysphagia (T- group) were compared versus outcomes after treatment under a standardized diagnostic and rehabilitative multidisciplinary protocol (T+ group). Outcome measures were death, pneumonia on X-ray, need for respiratory support, and proportion of patients on tube feeding at discharge. Of the 378 patients admitted with stroke, 84 had dysphagia and were enrolled in the study. A significantly lower risk of in-hospital death (odds ratio [OR] 0.20 [0.53-0.78]), pneumonia (OR 0.33 [0.10-1.03]), need for respiratory support (OR 0.48 [0.14-1.66]), and tube feeding at discharge (OR 0.30 [0.09-0.91]) was recorded for the T+ group (N = 39) as compared to the T- group (N = 45). The adjusted OR showed no difference between the two groups for in-hospital death and tube feeding at discharge. Use of a standardized multidisciplinary protocolized approach to the management of post-stroke dysphagia may significantly reduce rates of aspiration pneumonia, in-hospital mortality, and tube feeding in dysphagic stroke survivors. Consistent with the study's exploratory purposes, our findings suggest that the multidisciplinary protocol applied in this study offers an effective model of management of post-stroke dysphagia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ghana 1 1%
Unknown 83 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 13%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Master 9 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 10%
Other 5 6%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 28 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 24%
Neuroscience 7 8%
Computer Science 3 4%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 26 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 18 November 2017.
All research outputs
#13,418,909
of 23,839,820 outputs
Outputs from Dysphagia
#880
of 1,327 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,936
of 233,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dysphagia
#10
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,839,820 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,327 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 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 233,354 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.