Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the discriminant ability of the eating assessment tool-10 (EAT-10) to detect postswallow residue and aspiration for different consistencies.
METHODS: Seventy-two consecutive patients with mixed etiology of dysphagia (42 males and 30 females, mean ± sd age of 60.42 ± 15.82) were included. After completing the EAT-10, Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) was performed to assess the efficiency and safety of swallowing for the following consistencies: thin liquid, nectar thick, yogurt, and solid. While swallowing efficiency was evaluated using the Yale Pharyngeal Residue Severity Rating Scale (YPRSRS), the Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS) was used to evaluate swallowing safety.
RESULTS: The EAT-10 questionnaire significantly identified the patients with residue from those without residue for the following consistencies and anatomic locations: thin liquid residue in the pyriform sinus (cutoff score ≥ 10, p = 0.009), nectar thick residue in the vallecula (cutoff score ≥ 15, p = 0.001), yogurt residue in the vallecula (cutoff score ≥ 15, p = 0.009), yogurt residue in the pyriform sinus (cutoff score ≥ 9, p = 0.015), and solid residue in the vallecula (cutoff score ≥ 13, p = 0.016). However, the same discriminant ability of EAT-10 was not found for detecting aspiration in any consistency.
CONCLUSIONS: The EAT-10 questionnaire can be used as an assessment tool to judge swallowing efficiency in patients with mixed etiology of dysphagia, but the same is not evident for swallowing safety.
METHODS: Seventy-two consecutive patients with mixed etiology of dysphagia (42 males and 30 females, mean ± sd age of 60.42 ± 15.82) were included. After completing the EAT-10, Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) was performed to assess the efficiency and safety of swallowing for the following consistencies: thin liquid, nectar thick, yogurt, and solid. While swallowing efficiency was evaluated using the Yale Pharyngeal Residue Severity Rating Scale (YPRSRS), the Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS) was used to evaluate swallowing safety.
RESULTS: The EAT-10 questionnaire significantly identified the patients with residue from those without residue for the following consistencies and anatomic locations: thin liquid residue in the pyriform sinus (cutoff score ≥ 10, p = 0.009), nectar thick residue in the vallecula (cutoff score ≥ 15, p = 0.001), yogurt residue in the vallecula (cutoff score ≥ 15, p = 0.009), yogurt residue in the pyriform sinus (cutoff score ≥ 9, p = 0.015), and solid residue in the vallecula (cutoff score ≥ 13, p = 0.016). However, the same discriminant ability of EAT-10 was not found for detecting aspiration in any consistency.
CONCLUSIONS: The EAT-10 questionnaire can be used as an assessment tool to judge swallowing efficiency in patients with mixed etiology of dysphagia, but the same is not evident for swallowing safety.
摘要：
目的：研究进食评估工具-10（EAT-10）在不同稠度下检测吞咽后残留和误吸的判别能力。
方法：连续72例吞咽困难的混合病因患者（男42例，女30例，平均±sd年龄为60.42±15.82）。完成EAT-10后，进行了纤维内窥镜吞咽评估（FEES），以评估吞咽的效率和安全性，以满足以下稠度：稀薄液体，浓浓的花蜜，酸奶,和固体。虽然使用耶鲁咽部残留严重程度评定量表（YPRSRS）评估吞咽效率，采用渗透抽吸量表(PAS)评估吞咽安全性.
结果：EAT-10问卷在以下一致性和解剖位置上显著识别了有残留物的患者和无残留物的患者：梨状窦中的稀薄液体残留物（截止分数≥10，p=0.009），谷粒中的花蜜浓稠残留物(截止分数≥15，p=0.001)，谷中的酸奶残留物(截止分数≥15，p=0.009)，梨状窦中的酸奶残留物（截止分数≥9，p=0.015），和谷中的固体残留物(截止分数≥13，p=0.016)。然而,没有发现EAT-10在检测任何一致性的误吸方面具有相同的判别能力.
结论：EAT-10问卷可作为判断混合病因吞咽困难患者吞咽效率的评估工具，但吞咽安全的情况并不明显。
方法：连续72例吞咽困难的混合病因患者（男42例，女30例，平均±sd年龄为60.42±15.82）。完成EAT-10后，进行了纤维内窥镜吞咽评估（FEES），以评估吞咽的效率和安全性，以满足以下稠度：稀薄液体，浓浓的花蜜，酸奶,和固体。虽然使用耶鲁咽部残留严重程度评定量表（YPRSRS）评估吞咽效率，采用渗透抽吸量表(PAS)评估吞咽安全性.
结果：EAT-10问卷在以下一致性和解剖位置上显著识别了有残留物的患者和无残留物的患者：梨状窦中的稀薄液体残留物（截止分数≥10，p=0.009），谷粒中的花蜜浓稠残留物(截止分数≥15，p=0.001)，谷中的酸奶残留物(截止分数≥15，p=0.009)，梨状窦中的酸奶残留物（截止分数≥9，p=0.015），和谷中的固体残留物(截止分数≥13，p=0.016)。然而,没有发现EAT-10在检测任何一致性的误吸方面具有相同的判别能力.
结论：EAT-10问卷可作为判断混合病因吞咽困难患者吞咽效率的评估工具，但吞咽安全的情况并不明显。
