Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Usefulness of a handheld nebulizer in cough test to screen for silent aspiration

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Odontology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cough test to screen for silent aspiration (SA) was reported, and the effectiveness was excellent. However, the device was rather large so that the portability was poor. So, the purpose of this study is to investigate the usefulness of a handheld nebulizer for the test and verify the reproducibility of the method. The subjects were 160 patients who were suspected of having dysphagia and underwent videofluorography (VF) or videoendoscopy (VE). They inhaled 1.0 % citric acid-physiologic saline orally for 1 min using a handheld nebulizer, and the examiner observed the number of coughs: more than five coughs was considered as negative (normal), while less than four coughs was regarded as positive. Among the subjects, 70 patients administered the cough test and VF or VE twice or more at some intervals. The k coefficient was calculated in reproducibility. Using the results of the VF or VE examination as the standards, for SA detection, the sensitivity was 0.86, specificity was 0.71, positive predictive value was 0.53, and negative predictive value was 0.93. The k coefficient was 0.79. In conclusion, the handheld nebulizer was useful in the cough test to screen for SA. Furthermore, satisfactory reproducibility was shown.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wakasugi Y, Tohara H, Hattori F, Motohashi Y, Nakane A, Goto S, Ouchi Y, Mikushi S, Takeuchi S, Uematsu H. Screening test for silent aspiration at the bedside. Dysphagia. 2008;23:364–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Wakasugi Y, Tohara H, Motohashi Y, Tsushima C, Uematsu H. The progress of patients administered the cough test. Dysphagia. 2009;24:469. (abstract).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sekizawa K, Ujiie Y, Sasaki H. Measurement of cough threshold. Respir Circ. 1992;40:157–9. (in Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Sekizawa K, Ujiie Y, Itabashi S, Sasaki H, Takishima T. Lack of cough reflex in aspiration pneumonia. Lancet. 1990;335:1228–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Arai H, Sato T, Nakajoh K. The standard in decision of appropriateness of ingestion by cough test. A study of nutrition of dyaphagia aged people. 2000; 60–4. (in Japanese)

  6. Tanaka T, Baba T, Saito E, Okui Y, Tohara H, Mizuno M. An investigation of screening test of silent aspiration by cough test: the decision of the concentration of citric acid. Jpn J Dysphagia Rehabil. 2000;4:163. (in Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Iwata S. Current and attachments of aerosols in the use for allergic laryngitis. Oto-Rhino-Laryngology. 1995;38:169–78. (in Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Logemann JA. Evalutation and treatment of swallowing disorders. 2nd ed. Austin: Pro-Ed Publishers; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Langemore SE. Endoscopic evaluation and treatment of swallowing disorders. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bastian RW. The videoendoscopic swallowing study: an alternative and partner to the videofluoroscopic swallowing study. Dysphagia. 1993;8:359–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kidder TM, Langmore SE, Martin JW. Indications and techniques of endoscopy in evaluation of cervical dysphagia: comparison with radiographic techniques. Dysphagia. 1994;9:256–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Wu CH, Hsiao TY, Chen JC, Chang YC, Lee SY. Evaluation of swallowing safety with fiberoptic endoscope: comparison with videofluoroscopic technique. Laryngoscope. 1997;107:396–401.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Langmore SE. Evalutation of oropharyngeal dysphagia: which diagnostic tool is superior? Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2003;11:485–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Langmore SE, Schatz K, Olson N. Endoscopic and videofluoroscopic evaluations of swallowing and aspiration. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1991;100:678–81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Leder SB, Sasaki CT, Burrell MI. Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of dysphagia to identify silent aspiration. Dysphagia. 1998;13:19–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hafner G, Neuhuber A, Hirtenfelder S, Schmedler B, Eckel HE. Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing in intensive care unit patients. Laryngology. 2008;265:441–6.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kelly AM, Drinnan MJ, Leslie P. Assessing penetration and aspiration: how do videofluoroscopy and fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing compare? Laryngoscope. 2007;117:1723–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Horner J, Massey W. Silent aspiration following stroke. Neurology. 1988;38:317–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Leder SB, Suiter DM, Green BG. Silent aspiration risk is volume-dependent. Dysphagia. 2011;26:304–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rosenbek JC, Robbins JA, Roecker EB, Coyle JL, Wood JL. A penetration–aspiration scale. Dysphagia. 1996;11:93–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Dhand R, Guntur VP. How best to deliver aerosol medications to mechanically ventilated patients. Clin Chest Med. 2008;29:277–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Morice AH, Higgins KS, Yeo WW. Adaption of cough reflex with different types of stimulation. Eur Respir J. 1992;5:841–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ari A, Areabi H, Fink JB. Evalutation of aerosol generator devices at 3 locations in humidified and non-humidified circuits during adult mechanical ventilation. Respir Care. 2010;55:837–44.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Khatri L, Taylor KM, Craig DQ, Palin K. An assessment of jet and ultrasonic nebulizers for the delivery of lactate dehydrogenase solutions. Int J Pharm. 2001;227:21–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Arzhavitina A, Steckel H. Surface active drugs significantly alter the drug output rate from medical nebulizers. Int J Pharm. 2010;384:128–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pedersen KM, Handlos VN, Heslet L, Kristensen HG. Factors influencing the in vitro deposition of tobramycin aerosol: a comparison of an ultrasonic nebulizer and a high-frequency vibrating mesh nebulizer. J Aerosol Med. 2006;19:175–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Dicpinigaitis PV. Experimentally induced cough. Pulm Pharmacol Ther. 2007;20:319–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Schmidt D, Jorres RA, Magnussen H. Citric acid-induced cough thresholds in normal subjects, patients with bronchial asthma, and smokers. Eur J Med Res. 1997;29:384–8.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Auffarth B, de Monchy JG, van der Mark TW, Postma DS, Koeter GH. Citric acid cough threshold and airway responsiveness in asthmatic patients and smokers with chronic airflow obstruction. Thorax. 1991;46(9):638–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Barber CM, Curran AD, Bradshaw LM, Morice AH, Rawbone R, Fishwick D. Reproducibility and validity of a Yan-style portable citric acid cough challenge. Pulm Pharmacol Ther. 2005;18:177–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fontana GA, Pantaleo T. Repeatability of cough-related variables during fog challenges at threshold and suprathreshold stimulus intensity in humans. Eur Respir J. 1999;13:1447–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Fontana GA, Pantaleo T. A noninvasive electromyographic study on threshold and intensity of cough in humans. Eur Respir J. 1997;10:983–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported in part by Grants-in-Aid for young Scientists (B) from Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (21792145).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Osaka University Dental Hospital, Suita, Osaka, Japan

    Yoko Wakasugi

  2. Dysphagia Rehabilitation, Nihon University, Tokyo, Japan

    Haruka Tohara

  3. Gerodontology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan

    Ayako Nakane, Shino Murata, Shinya Mikushi, Chiaki Susa, Maho Takashima, Yoshiko Umeda, Ruriko Suzuki & Hiroshi Uematsu

Authors
  1. Yoko Wakasugi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Haruka Tohara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ayako Nakane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shino Murata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Shinya Mikushi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Chiaki Susa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Maho Takashima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Yoshiko Umeda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Ruriko Suzuki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Hiroshi Uematsu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yoko Wakasugi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wakasugi, Y., Tohara, H., Nakane, A. et al. Usefulness of a handheld nebulizer in cough test to screen for silent aspiration. Odontology 102, 76–80 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-012-0085-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10266-012-0085-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation