TY - JOUR
T1 - Risk Factors for Postextubation Dysphagia
T2 - A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
AU - McIntyre, Melanie
AU - Chimunda, Timothy
AU - Koppa, Mayank
AU - Dalton, Nathan
AU - Reinders, Hannah
AU - Doeltgen, Sebastian
PY - 2022/2
Y1 - 2022/2
N2 - Objectives/Hypothesis: To identify, describe, and where possible meaningfully synthesize the reported risk factors for postextubation dysphagia (PED) in critically ill patients. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic search of peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted in common scientific databases to identify previously evaluated risk factors of PED. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment used a double-blind approach. Random effects models were used for the meta-analyses. Meta-analyses were conducted where sufficient study numbers allowed after accounting for statistical and clinical heterogeneity. Results: Twenty-five studies were included, which investigated a total of 150 potential risk factors. Of these, 63 risk factors were previously identified by at least one study each as significantly increasing the risk of PED. After accounting for clinical and statistical heterogeneity, only two risk factors were suitable for meta-analysis, gender, and duration of intubation. In separate meta-analyses, neither gender (RR 1.00 [0.71, 1.43], I
2 = 0%) nor duration of intubation (RR 1.54 [−0.40, 3.49], I
2 = 0%) were significant predictors of PED. Conclusions: A large number of risk factors for PED have been reported in the literature. However, significant variability in swallowing assessment methods, patient populations, timing of assessment, and duration of intubation prevented meaningful meta-analyses for the majority of these risk factors. Where meta-analysis was possible, gender and duration of intubation were not identified as risk factors for PED. We discuss future directions in clinical and research contexts. Laryngoscope, 132:364–374, 2022.
AB - Objectives/Hypothesis: To identify, describe, and where possible meaningfully synthesize the reported risk factors for postextubation dysphagia (PED) in critically ill patients. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic search of peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted in common scientific databases to identify previously evaluated risk factors of PED. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment used a double-blind approach. Random effects models were used for the meta-analyses. Meta-analyses were conducted where sufficient study numbers allowed after accounting for statistical and clinical heterogeneity. Results: Twenty-five studies were included, which investigated a total of 150 potential risk factors. Of these, 63 risk factors were previously identified by at least one study each as significantly increasing the risk of PED. After accounting for clinical and statistical heterogeneity, only two risk factors were suitable for meta-analysis, gender, and duration of intubation. In separate meta-analyses, neither gender (RR 1.00 [0.71, 1.43], I
2 = 0%) nor duration of intubation (RR 1.54 [−0.40, 3.49], I
2 = 0%) were significant predictors of PED. Conclusions: A large number of risk factors for PED have been reported in the literature. However, significant variability in swallowing assessment methods, patient populations, timing of assessment, and duration of intubation prevented meaningful meta-analyses for the majority of these risk factors. Where meta-analysis was possible, gender and duration of intubation were not identified as risk factors for PED. We discuss future directions in clinical and research contexts. Laryngoscope, 132:364–374, 2022.
KW - critically ill patient
KW - intensive care
KW - intubation
KW - mechanical ventilation
KW - Postextubation dysphagia
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85097529919&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/lary.29311
DO - 10.1002/lary.29311
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85097529919
SN - 0023-852X
VL - 132
SP - 364
EP - 374
JO - Laryngoscope
JF - Laryngoscope
IS - 2
ER -