Scholarlink

Background <p>Dysphagia is a common problem in older adults that can lead to nutritional deficiencies. Oral nutritional supplements (ONS) are products used for oral nutrition support as an alternative nutritional therapy, specifically manufactured for the older individuals at risk of dysphagia. This study aimed to develop four high protein (23–34% energy ratio) and low carbohydrate (25–38% energy ratio) smoothie formulas (white sesame (WS) vs. white sesame and low carbohydrate (WSLC) vs. black sesame and low carbohydrate (BSLC) vs. chicken shitake (CS); 1&#xa0;kcal/ml) for the older people with dysphagia and to assess their effect on swallowing capacity compared to widely used commercial formula (Ensure<sup>®</sup>).</p> Methods <p>A cross-sectional study involved 63 participants aged 65 years or over. Subjects were divided into asymptomatic (<i>n</i> = 32, aged 72.9 ± 5.66 year) or symptomatic swallowing difficulty (<i>n</i> = 31, aged 75.0 ± 6.48 year) groups based on swallowing screening questionnaires. Swallowing capacity was assessed using Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES), performed by experienced physicians, for three drinks (WS, CS vs. Ensure<sup>®</sup>) in a blinded, randomly crossover sequence.</p> Results <p>Spare retention of a food bolus in each formula had been identified in the asymptomatic (47–66%) and symptomatic (61–71%) groups. WS had fewer premature spills than Ensure<sup>®</sup> in the symptomatic group, but not in the asymptomatic group (5 ± 0.03 vs. 4.7 ± 0.12, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.05), while CS had fewer premature spills than Ensure<sup>®</sup> in both groups.</p> Conclusions <p>The findings suggest that smoothie drinks, particularly WS (51–350 centipoise), may offer a viable alternative to commercial formula (1–50 centipoise) for older adults with dysphagia, potentially reducing premature spillage. The findings provide useful preliminary insights into the potential of these formulas to support safer swallowing. Further research, including longer-term studies, would help to more fully explore their nutritional benefits, safety, and applicability across broader populations.</p> Trial registration <p>Clinical Trial ID NCT04901182, https//clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04901182 (25/05/2021).</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Evaluating swallowing capacity in older adults with dysphagia: high protein, low carbohydrate smoothie formulas versus commercial formula

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年7月2日

查看全文
  • Pichanun Mongkolsucharitkul,
  • Bonggochpass Pinsawas,
  • Thareerat Watcharachaisoponsiri,
  • Sophida Suta,
  • Sureeporn Pumeiam,
  • Suphawan Ophakas,
  • Apinya Surawit,
  • Sunun Ongard,
  • Phawin Keskool,
  • Poungkaew Thitisakulchai,
  • Phisamai Srichayet,
  • Korapat Mayurasakorn

摘要

Background

Dysphagia is a common problem in older adults that can lead to nutritional deficiencies. Oral nutritional supplements (ONS) are products used for oral nutrition support as an alternative nutritional therapy, specifically manufactured for the older individuals at risk of dysphagia. This study aimed to develop four high protein (23–34% energy ratio) and low carbohydrate (25–38% energy ratio) smoothie formulas (white sesame (WS) vs. white sesame and low carbohydrate (WSLC) vs. black sesame and low carbohydrate (BSLC) vs. chicken shitake (CS); 1 kcal/ml) for the older people with dysphagia and to assess their effect on swallowing capacity compared to widely used commercial formula (Ensure®).

Methods

A cross-sectional study involved 63 participants aged 65 years or over. Subjects were divided into asymptomatic (n = 32, aged 72.9 ± 5.66 year) or symptomatic swallowing difficulty (n = 31, aged 75.0 ± 6.48 year) groups based on swallowing screening questionnaires. Swallowing capacity was assessed using Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES), performed by experienced physicians, for three drinks (WS, CS vs. Ensure®) in a blinded, randomly crossover sequence.

Results

Spare retention of a food bolus in each formula had been identified in the asymptomatic (47–66%) and symptomatic (61–71%) groups. WS had fewer premature spills than Ensure® in the symptomatic group, but not in the asymptomatic group (5 ± 0.03 vs. 4.7 ± 0.12, p < 0.05), while CS had fewer premature spills than Ensure® in both groups.

Conclusions

The findings suggest that smoothie drinks, particularly WS (51–350 centipoise), may offer a viable alternative to commercial formula (1–50 centipoise) for older adults with dysphagia, potentially reducing premature spillage. The findings provide useful preliminary insights into the potential of these formulas to support safer swallowing. Further research, including longer-term studies, would help to more fully explore their nutritional benefits, safety, and applicability across broader populations.

Trial registration

Clinical Trial ID NCT04901182, https//clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04901182 (25/05/2021).