Exercise using tongue‐holding swallow does not improve swallowing function in normal subjects

Abstract

We evaluated the effects of repetitive tongue-holding swallow (THS) as an exercise for improving swallowing function. Twenty healthy subjects were randomly divided into two groups. One group [THS group (THSG)] performed the tongue-holding manoeuvre every 5s for 20min. The other group (normal swallow group) swallowed without tongue-holding for the same length of time as a control. Twenty sessions of training were performed for 4weeks. All participants also had a videofluoroscopic swallowing study for analysing the biomechanical parameters of swallowing (hyolaryngeal movement, posterior pharyngeal wall movement and the pharyngeal constriction ratio). After 4weeks of training, none of the biomechanical parameters changed in either group. Exercise using THS did not affect swallowing function in normal subjects.

Effect of partial head extension swallowing exercise on the strength of the suprahyoid and tongue muscles in healthy subjects: A feasibility study

“…Mishra et al reported that 6‐week head lift exercise and recline exercise did not significantly alter suprahyoid muscle activation in healthy adults. Similarly, Oh et al reported that 4‐week saliva swallowing exercise and tongue holding swallowing exercise did not change significantly the hyolaryngeal movement and pharyngeal constriction in healthy young adults. The common feature of these two studies is that no significant increase in swallowing‐related muscle strength was induced by these exercises, which are known to improve the strength of swallowing muscles in patients with swallowing disorder, when applied to healthy adults.…”

A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials in the Field of Dysphagia Rehabilitation

“…In total, 20 studies met all eligibility criteria and were included in the systematic review. While all the studies included self-identified as RCTs, only 15 met the RCT criteria by including a true comparison (control) arm [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26]. A further 5 studies utilized sham/ placebo comparators only (without a standard control comparison) or non-randomized controls and were deemed quasi-randomized trials [26][27][28][29][30].…”

“…The average size of study recruitment was 64.5 (SD 37.4), with the range from 16 [21] to 130 [22] subjects. The mean ages of patients enrolled across the RCTs ranged from 25.4 [18] to 80 [13]. The proportion of subjects recruited were 1.5 times more likely to be male (1,190) versus female (793).…”

“…Two studies were conducted using acute care patients [11,14], four with sub-acute rehabilitation patients [12,13,21,24] and eight with either chronic conditions [23] or patients presenting for outpatient-based medical interventions [15-17, 19, 20, 22, 25]. An additional study utilized healthy normal volunteers only [18].…”

“…In four studies, confirmation of dysphagia status was made on the basis of a non-validated clinical examination [13,14,23] or patient history [20]. Seven studies utilized a validated clinical exam only [11], videofluoroscopic examination only [21], or both methods [12,18,19,25]. Additionally, two studies utilized patient report or a quality of life survey [15,17] and only one study did not specifically report the process for dysphagia status confirmation at study onset [16].…”