↓ Skip to main content

A comprehensive intervention following the clinical pathway of eating and swallowing disorder in the elderly with dementia: historically controlled study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Geriatrics, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
28 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
176 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A comprehensive intervention following the clinical pathway of eating and swallowing disorder in the elderly with dementia: historically controlled study
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12877-017-0531-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Masahisa Arahata, Makoto Oura, Yuka Tomiyama, Naoe Morikawa, Hatsue Fujii, Shinji Minani, Yukihiro Shimizu

Abstract

Eating problems in patients with advanced dementia are strongly associated with their deteriorating survival. Food and drink intake in people with dementia may be supported by specific interventions, but the effectiveness of such interventions is backed by almost no evidence. However, comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) might potentially clarify the etiology of decreased oral intake in people with dementia; thus improving their clinical outcomes. This study was a single-arm, non-randomized trial that included historically controlled patients for comparison. We defined elderly patients with both severely decreased oral intake depending on artificial hydration and/or nutrition (AHN) and dementia as "Eating and Swallowing Disorder of the Elderly with Dementia (ESDED)". In the intervention group, participants received CGA through the original clinical pathway with multidisciplinary interventions. This was followed by individualized therapeutic interventions according to assessment of the etiology of their eating problems. During the intervention period (between 1st April 2013 and 31st March 2015), 102 cases of ESDED were enrolled in the study and 90 patients had completed receiving CGA. Conversely, 124 ESDED patient controls were selected from the same hospital enrolled during the historical period (between 1st April 2011 and 31st March 2012). Most participants in both groups were bedridden with severe cognitive impairment. For the intervention group, an average of 4.3 interventional strategies was recommended per participant after CGA. Serological tests, diagnostic imaging and other diagnostic examinations were much more frequently performed in the intervention group. Recovery rate from ESDED in the intervention group was significantly higher than that in the historical group (51% v.s. 34%, respectively, P = 0.02). The 1-year AHN-free survival in the intervention group was significantly higher than that in the historical group (28% v.s. 15%, respectively, P = 0.01). No significant difference between the two groups was found for 1-year overall survival (37% v.s. 28%, respectively, P = 0.08). Use of CGA with multidisciplinary interventions could improve the functional status of eating and allow elderly patients with severe eating problems and dementia to survive independently without the need for AHN. ISRCTN57646445 , this trial was retrospectively registered on 8th December 2015.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 176 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 176 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 18%
Researcher 13 7%
Student > Bachelor 13 7%
Student > Postgraduate 11 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 6%
Other 30 17%
Unknown 67 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 44 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 16%
Psychology 8 5%
Computer Science 3 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 2%
Other 18 10%
Unknown 72 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 July 2020.
All research outputs
#2,028,164
of 25,844,815 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#441
of 3,722 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,530
of 325,802 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#15
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,844,815 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,722 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,802 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.