2016
DOI: 10.1177/0269215516677739
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A systematic review and meta-analysis of pneumonia associated with thin liquid vs. thickened liquid intake in patients who aspirate

Abstract: There was no significant difference in the risk of pneumonia in aspirating patients who took thin liquids with safety strategies compared with those who took thickened liquids only. This result, however, is generalizable only for patients with low risk of pneumonia.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
41
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
1
41
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…() and Kaneoka et al . () also report that the evidence in favour of TL is not strong. In this arena of less‐than‐robust empirical evidence and embedded use of TL, there also exists limited evidence from people who have had strokes as to the lived experience and acceptability of using thickeners.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…() and Kaneoka et al . () also report that the evidence in favour of TL is not strong. In this arena of less‐than‐robust empirical evidence and embedded use of TL, there also exists limited evidence from people who have had strokes as to the lived experience and acceptability of using thickeners.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…On a positive note, recent systematic reviews carried out by Newman et al (2016) and Steele et al (2015) conclude that there is some evidence for thicker liquids reducing the risk of airway invasion. However, Steele et al along with other reviewers including Andersen et al (2016) and Kaneoka et al (2016) also report that the evidence in favour of TL is not strong. In this arena of less-than-robust empirical evidence and embedded use of TL, there also exists limited evidence from people who have had strokes as to the lived experience and acceptability of using thickeners.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Gillman et al, Kaneoka et al, and Loeb et al found no statistical difference in the risk of developing aspiration pneumonia in patients granted access to free water when compared to those with thickened liquids. 1,9,12,15 In the meta-analysis of Gillman et al of 206 patients, there was no significant increase in the odds of having lung complications when allowing patients access to free water in comparison to thickened liquids (odds ratio 1.51, 95% confidence interval 0.2-100.03). 1 The meta-analysis of Kaneoka et al showed no significant difference in the odds of developing pneumonia in patients with access to free water compared with thickened liquids in a sample of 135 patients (odds ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.05-13.42).…”
Section: Why You Might Think Thickened Liquids Are Helpful For Adult mentioning
confidence: 95%
“…9 These results, although mostly based on imaging findings and in only narrow populations, have been widely extrapolated to routine clinical practice. 1,9,12 WHY THICKENED LIQUIDS ARE NOT HELPFUL FOR ADULT PATIENTS WITH DYSPHAGIA Evidence against thickened liquids dates back to 1994, when a comparative effectiveness trial of stroke patients found that family instruction on appropriate compensatory swallowing techniques without the use of thickened liquids carried no increased risk of pneumonia, dehydration, malnutrition, or death when compared with thickened liquids. 13 Recent evidence has established the risk for harm with thickened liquids.…”
Section: Why You Might Think Thickened Liquids Are Helpful For Adult mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation