The Laryngoscope · 2022
Effects of Carbonation on Swallowing: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nagano Ayano, Maeda Keisuke, Shimizu Akio, Murotani Kenta, Mori Naoharu
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The effectiveness of the use of carbonation in preventing penetration/aspiration or enhancing swallowing function in adults remains unclear. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of carbonation on improving swallowing function in adult subjects.
METHODS: Literature published before March 2021 was inspected using MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection, The Cochrane Library, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Ichushi-web databases. We searched for intervention studies or randomized control trials considering the effects of carbonated liquids on swallowing function. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool for assessing the risk of bias for randomized controlled trials and the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Nonrandomized Studies.
RESULTS: The systematic review identified 19 studies with a total of 586 participants. The effects of carbonation on swallowing function are diverse. Overall, most studies showed that carbonation promotes swallowing function compared to other liquids. Five studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. Meta-analysis showed that carbonated liquids prevent aspiration (risk difference [RD] -0.27%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.44 to -0.10; I2 = 0%; number needed to treat 3.8, 95% CI 2.2 to 15.0; moderate quality of evidence) when compared to noncarbonated thin liquids. Carbonated liquids also increased the duration of swallowing apnea than did noncarbonated liquids (standardized mean difference 0.25 (mean difference 0.36 seconds), 95% CI 0.03 to 0.47; I2 = 0%; low quality of evidence).
CONCLUSIONS: Carbonation had favorable effects on swallowing function. Further in-depth studies are needed to clarify the benefits of carbonation.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 132:1924-1933, 2022.
METHODS: Literature published before March 2021 was inspected using MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection, The Cochrane Library, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Ichushi-web databases. We searched for intervention studies or randomized control trials considering the effects of carbonated liquids on swallowing function. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool for assessing the risk of bias for randomized controlled trials and the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Nonrandomized Studies.
RESULTS: The systematic review identified 19 studies with a total of 586 participants. The effects of carbonation on swallowing function are diverse. Overall, most studies showed that carbonation promotes swallowing function compared to other liquids. Five studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. Meta-analysis showed that carbonated liquids prevent aspiration (risk difference [RD] -0.27%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.44 to -0.10; I2 = 0%; number needed to treat 3.8, 95% CI 2.2 to 15.0; moderate quality of evidence) when compared to noncarbonated thin liquids. Carbonated liquids also increased the duration of swallowing apnea than did noncarbonated liquids (standardized mean difference 0.25 (mean difference 0.36 seconds), 95% CI 0.03 to 0.47; I2 = 0%; low quality of evidence).
CONCLUSIONS: Carbonation had favorable effects on swallowing function. Further in-depth studies are needed to clarify the benefits of carbonation.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 132:1924-1933, 2022.