Objective Anecdotal evidence shows that the Shaker exercise and its modifications improve pharyngeal muscle contraction. However, there is no experimental evidence for the same. Thus, the present study examined the effect of modified Shaker exercise on the amplitude and duration of pharyngeal muscle contraction using cervical auscultation. Design The study follows a cross-sectional study design, where 50 healthy individuals (23 males and 27 females) performed modified Shaker exercise and noneffortful swallow during 10 ml water swallowing. Swallow sound characteristics were analyzed with and without modified Shaker exercise using cervical auscultation. Results The results of mixed ANOVA revealed significant differences for the amplitude of swallow sound with modified Shaker exercise (mean = 47.24, SD = 20.64) when compared to noneffortful swallow (mean = 28.19, SD = 10.26) at p < 0.05. However, no significant difference was obtained for the swallow sound duration with (mean = 0.19, SD = 0.07) and without (mean = 0.18, SD = 0.07) modified Shaker exercise at p > 0.05. No significant difference across the genders was also noted at p > 0.05. Conclusion The outcomes of the study suggest that modified Shaker exercise improves the amplitude of pharyngeal muscle contraction. Further studies are needed to confirm this finding using gold standard tools like videofluoroscopy.

No abstract

Background. Reduced UES opening is a well-known risk factor for dysphagia. The Shaker exercise and the CTAR are the widely used intervention strategies to bring about effective UES opening. But there are well-known difficulties with the clinical use of these two exercise regimes. The present study proposes a clinical alternative to Shaker’s exercise and CTAR called the forehead against resistance (FAR) and its variants without altering the central principles of these two regimes. The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy of FAR and its variants in bringing about UES opening. Method. The study used a comparative cross-sectional study design, with the nonrandomized convenient sampling that included 27 healthy adults. MBS was carried out in the anterior-posterior and lateral views, while the participants performed FAR and its variants. The UES diameter was measured in the baseline and with the subjects performing FAR maneuver and its variants. Results. The result revealed that the participants had greater UES opening on FAR and its variant than the baseline swallow. Also, mean values of UES opening were greater for FAR with chin tuck when compared to FAR alone, although there was no significant main effect with exercise. Conclusion. FAR and its variant could be one of the options for increasing UES opening in individuals with dysphagia.