Tongue pressure profile training for dysphagia post stroke (TPPT): study protocol for an exploratory randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is estimated that approximately 50% of stroke survivors will experience swallowing difficulty, or dysphagia. The associated sequelae of dysphagia include dehydration, malnutrition, and aspiration pneumonia, all of which have can have serious medical consequences. To improve swallowing safety and efficiency, alternative nutritional intake methods (for example, a feeding tube) or a modified diet texture (such as pureed foods or thickened liquids) may be recommended but these modifications may negatively affect quality of life. An alternative approach to treating dysphagia has emerged over the past few years, targeting stronger lingual muscles through maximal isometric pressure tasks. Although these studies have shown promising results, thin-liquid bolus control continues to be challenging for patients with dysphagia. Previous work investigating lingual pressures when healthy participants swallow has suggested that greater task specificity in lingual exercises may yield improved results with thin liquids. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a small, exploratory randomized clinical trial being conducted with post-stroke patients 4 to 20 weeks after onset of dysphagia secondary to impaired lingual control. At enrollment, participants are randomly assigned to one of two treatment protocols, either tongue pressure profile training (TPPT) or the control treatment, tongue pressure strength-and-accuracy training (TPSAT). Each treatment protocol consists of 24 sessions of treatment over 8 to 12 weeks with monitoring of tongue pressure as well as a baseline and outcome videofluoroscopic swallowing study. Tongue pressure measures, videofluoroscopic measures, and functional outcome measures will be obtained following training of 60 participants (30 in each condition), to determine whether TPPT yields better outcomes. DISCUSSION: This study will continue to explore options beyond tube feeding and modified diets for people with neurogenic dysphagia following stroke. Should the novel protocol, TPPT, prove to be more effective than the TPSAT protocol, this may influence standards of care and best practices for patients with dysphagia involving impaired thin-liquid control as a result of stroke. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov http://NCT01370083.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.033 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".