Incidence and impact of dysphagia in patients receiving prolonged endotracheal intubation after cardiac surgery.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiac surgery is frequently associated with prolonged endotracheal intubation. Because oral feeding is an important component of patient recovery after high-risk surgery, we sought to examine the contribution of dysphagia in the recuperation process after prolonged endotracheal intubation. METHODS: All 254 adult patients who survived cardiac surgery between 2001 and 2004 at the Toronto General Hospital and in whom endotracheal intubation lasted for 48 hours or longer were eligible for our retrospective review. We used multivariate regression analysis and parametric modelling to identify patient-specific characteristics associated with postextubation dysphagia and the subsequent resumption of normal oral feeding. RESULTS: Dysphagia was diagnosed in 130 (51%) patients. Incremental factors associated with an increased risk for postextubation dysphagia included duration of endotracheal intubation (p < 0.001), the occurrence of a perioperative cerebrovascular event (p = 0.014) and the presence of perioperative sepsis (p = 0.016). Neither preoperative patient risks nor index procedural characteristics were influential factors. The occurrence of dysphagia (p < 0.001) and the duration of endotracheal intubation (p < 0.001) were the only independent factors associated with a delayed return to normal oral feeding. In contrast, several independent factors were associated with a delay to hospital discharge, including the presence of dysphagia (p < 0.001), occurrence of perioperative stroke (p < 0.001), duration of endotracheal intubation (p < 0.001) and number of endotracheal intubation events (p < 0.006). CONCLUSION: Dysphagia is more common in patients with prolonged endotracheal intubation after cardiac surgery than has previously been reported. The duration of postoperative endotracheal intubation is a strong predictor of subsequent dysphagia that both prolongs the return to normal oral feeding and delays subsequent hospital discharge. Patient-or procedure-specific factors are not good predictors. To accelerate discharge of high-risk patients, aggressive nutritional supplementation should pre-empt extubation and swallowing surveillance should follow.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".