Advertisement

Dysphagia

, Volume 30, Issue 6, pp 702–713 | Cite as

Relationships Among Rheological, Sensory Texture, and Swallowing Pressure Measurements of Hydrocolloid-Thickened Fluids

  • Z. VickersEmail author
  • H. Damodhar
  • C. Grummer
  • H. Mendenhall
  • K. Banaszynski
  • R. Hartel
  • J. Hind
  • A. Joyce
  • A. Kaufman
  • J. Robbins
Original Article

Abstract

The objective of this study was to examine the relationships among three categories of measurements (rheological, sensory texture, and swallowing pressure) from fluids thickened to two different viscosities with 15 different hydrocolloids. Fluids at viscosities of 300 and 1500 cP (at 30 s−1) were targeted because these are the viscosities corresponding to the barium standards used in radiographic dysphagia diagnosis. Within the low viscosity (nectar) fluids (300 cP), the sensory properties thickness, stickiness, adhesiveness, mouth coating, and number of swallows were highly positively correlated with each other and highly positively correlated with the flow behavior index, n value (an indicator of shear-thinning behavior). Within the higher viscosity (thin honey) fluids (1500 cP), the sensory textures of adhesiveness, stickiness, mouth coating, and number of swallows correlated positively with rheological measures of n value. Swallowing pressures measured in the anterior oral cavity correlated negatively with the consistency coefficient k [shear stress/(shear rate) n ]. Samples that were more shear thinning (lower n values, higher k values) were generally perceived as less thick, with less adhesive properties (stickiness, adhesiveness, mouthcoating, and number of swallows). This information can be useful for selecting thickeners for people with dysphagia. A desirable thickener for many dysphagic patients would be one that allowed for a safe swallow by being viscous enough to reduce airway penetration, yet pleasant to drink, having the minimal perceived thickness and mouthcoating associated with greater shear thinning.

Keywords

Fluid rheology Swallowing pressure Thickness Mouthcoating Sensory evaluation Flow behavior 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This project was supported by National Research Initiative Grant 12143 from the USDA Cooperative state Research, Education and Extension Service, and the Wm. S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center (GRECC). This manuscript was partially prepared at the William S. Middleton Veteran Affairs Hospital in Madison, WI; GRECC manuscript #2015-015. The views and content expressed in this article are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position, policy, or official views of the Department of Veteran Affairs or the U.S. government. This research was partly supported by the Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station.

Supplementary material

455_2015_9647_MOESM1_ESM.docx (17 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 16 kb)
455_2015_9647_MOESM2_ESM.docx (19 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 18 kb)
455_2015_9647_MOESM3_ESM.doc (64 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOC 64 kb)
455_2015_9647_MOESM4_ESM.doc (81 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (DOC 81 kb)
455_2015_9647_MOESM5_ESM.doc (58 kb)
Supplementary material 5 (DOC 58 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Roy N, Stemple J, Merrill RM, Thomas L. Dysphagia in the elderly: preliminary evidence of prevalence, risk factors, and socioemotional effects. Ann Otol, Rhinol Laryngol. 2007;116(11):858–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adeleye B, Rachal C. Comparison of the rheological properties of ready-to-serve and powdered instant food-thickened beverages at different temperatures for dysphagic patients. J Am Diet Assoc. 2007;107:1176–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lotong V, Chun S, Chambers E, Garcia J. Texture and flavor characteristics of beverages containing commercial thickening agents for dysphagia diets. J Food Sci. 2000;68(4):1537–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Macqueen CE, Taubert S, Cotter D, Stevens S, Frost GS. Which commercial thickening agent do patients prefer? Dysphagia. 2003;18(1):46–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Matta Z, Chambers E IV, Garcia JM, Helverson JMG. Sensory characteristics of beverages prepared with commercial thickeners used for dysphagia diets. J Am Diet Assoc. 2006;106(7):1049–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pelletier CA, Lawless HT. Measuring taste acceptance in neurologically impaired adults. Food Qual Prefer. 2003;14(7):595–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Whelan K. Inadequate fluid intakes in dysphagic acute stroke. Clin Nutr. 2001;20(5):423–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mills R. Rheology overview: control of liquid viscosities in dysphagia management. Nutr Clin Pract. 1999;14(5, suppl):S52–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pelletier CA. A comparison of consistency and taste of five commercial thickeners. Dysphagia. 1997;12(2):74–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stanek K, Hensley C, Van Riper C. Factors affecting use of food and commercial agents to thicken liquids for individuals with swallowing disorders. J Am Diet Assoc. 1992;92:488–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Crary MA, Groher ME. Introduction to adult swallowing disorders. St Louis: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2003.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Huckabee ML, Pelletier CA. Management of adult neurogenic dysphagia. San Diego: Singular Group Inc; 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nishinari K, Takemasa M, Su L, Michiwaki Y, Mizunuma H, Ogoshi H. Effect of shear thinning on aspiration—toward making solutions for judging the risk of aspiration. Food Hydrocoll. 2011;25(7):1737–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wood FW. Psychophysical Studies on the consistency of liquid foods. Rheology and Texture of Foodstuffs, SCI Monograph, (1968). No. 27, p. 40.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    National Dysphagia Diet Task Force. National dysphagia diet: standardization for optimal care. Chicago: American Dietetic Association; 2002.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    OuldEleya MM, Gunasekaran S. Rheology of fluid foods for dysphagic patients. Appl Rheol. 2007;17:33137.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Payne C, Methven L, Bell A. Consistently inconsistent: commercially available starch-based dysphagia products. Dysphagia. 2009;26(1):27–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Brito-de la Fuente E, Ekberg O, Gallegos C. Rheological Aspects of Swallowing and Dysphagia. In: Eckberg O, editor. Dysphagia: diagnosis and treatment. New York: Springer; 2012. p. 493–506.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rao MA. Rheology of liquid foods—a review. J Texture Stud. 1977;8(2):135–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Steffe JF. Rheological methods in Food Process Engineering. 2nd ed. East Lansing: Freeman Press; 1996.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bourne MC. Food texture and viscosity concept and measurement. 2nd ed. San Diego: Academic Press; 2002. p. 257–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Szczesniak A. Psychorheology and texture as factors controlling the consumer acceptance of food. Cereal Foods World. 1990;35:1201–5.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Carvalho-da-Silva AM, Van Damme I, Wolf B, Hort J. Characterisation of chocolate eating behaviour. Physiol Behav. 2011;104:929–33. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2011.06.001.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Szczesniak AS. Classification of Textural Characteristics. J Food Sci. 1963;28(4):385–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kokini J, Kadane J, Cussler E. Liquid texture perceived in the mouth. J Texture Stud. 1977;8(2):195–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Aime D, Arntfield S, Malcolmson L, Ryland D. Textural analysis of fat reduced vanilla ice cream products. Food Res Int. 2001;34:237–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Carvalho-da-Silva AM, Van Damme I, Taylor W, Hort J, Wolf B. Oral processing of two milk chocolate samples. Food Funct. 2013;4(3):461–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hind JA, Nicosia MA, Gangnon R, Robbins JA. The effects of intraoral pressure sensors on normal young and old swallowing patterns. Dysphagia. 2005;20(4):249–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Miller JL, Watkin KL. The influence of bolus volume and viscosity on anterior lingual force during the oral stage of swallowing. Dysphagia. 1996;11(2):117–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pouderoux P, Kahrilas PJ. Deglutitive tongue force modulation by volition, volume, and viscosity in humans. Gastroenterology. 1995;108(5):1418–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Shaker R, Cook IJS, Dodds WJ, Hogan WJ. Pressure-flow dynamics of the oral phase of swallowing. Dysphagia. 1988;3(2):79–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Nicosia MA, Hind JA, Roecker EB, Carnes M, Doyle J, Dengel GA, Robbins JA. Age effects on the temporal evolution of isometric and swallowing pressure. J Gerontol Ser A. 2000;55(11):M634–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hootman RC. Manual on descriptive analysis testing for sensory evaluation. Philadelphia: ASTM International; 1992. p. 52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    MacFie HJ, Bratchell N, Greenhoff K, Vallis LV. Designs to balance the effect of order of presentation and first-order carry-over effects in hall tests. J Sens Stud. 1989;4(2):129–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Scott M, Hill F, Norris L, Heuser G. Chemical determination of riboflavin. J Biol Chem. 1946;165(1):65–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Shama F, Sherman P. Identification of stimuli controlling the sensory evaluation of viscosity II. Oral methods. J Texture Stud. 1973;4(1):111–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Engmann J, Burbidge AS. Fluid mechanics of eating, swallowing and digestion—overview and perspectives. Food Funct. 2013;4:443.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Cutler AN, Morris ER, Taylor LJ. Oral perception of viscosity in fluid foods and model systems. J Texture Stud. 1983;14:377–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sherman P. Hydrocolloid solutions and gels. Sensory evaluation of some textural characteristics and their dependence on rheological properties. Prog Food Nutr Sci. 1982;6:266–84.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Stokes JR. Oral? rheology. Food oral processing. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2012. p. 225–63. doi: 10.1002/9781444360943.ch11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nicosia MA. Theoretical estimation of shear rate during the oral phase of swallowing: effect of partial slip. J Texture Stud. 2013;. doi: 10.1111/jtxs.12005.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Houska M, Valentova H, Novotna P, Strohalm J, Sestak J, Pokorny J. Shear rates during oral and nonoral perception of viscosity of fluid foods. J Texture Stud. 1998;29(6):603–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hasegawa A, Otoguro A, Kumagai H, Nakazawa F. Velocity of swallowed gel food in the pharynx by ultrasonic method. J Jpn Soc Food Sci Technol. 2005;52:441–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Rao MA, Lopes da Silva JA. Role of rheological behavior in sensory assessment of foods and swallowing. In: Rao MA, editor. Rheology of fluid and semisolid foods: principals and applications. Second ed. New York: Springer; 2007. p. 403–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    O’Leary M, Hanson B, Smith C. Viscosity and non-Newtonian features of thickened fluids used for dysphagia therapy. J Food Sci. 2010;75(6):E330–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Food Science and NutritionUniversity of MinnesotaSt. PaulUSA
  2. 2.Department of Food ScienceUniversity of WisconsinMadisonUSA
  3. 3.Department of MedicineUniversity of WisconsinMadisonUSA
  4. 4.William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans HospitalMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations