File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of the Effects of Sensory Modulation Treatments for Neurogenic Oropharyngeal Dysphagia

TitleA Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of the Effects of Sensory Modulation Treatments for Neurogenic Oropharyngeal Dysphagia
Authors
Issue Date8-Jul-2025
PublisherWiley
Citation
CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics, 2025, v. 31, n. 7 How to Cite?
Abstract

Background

Oropharyngeal sensory stimulation has been applied broadly in clinical dysphagia management, but evidence remains limited.

Aims

We aimed to determine its effectiveness in treating neurogenic dysphagia (ND).

Material and Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using studies from PubMed, EMBASE (via Ovid), CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, searched up to January 2025. We included randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing sensory stimulations, including electrical and gustatory stimulation, with sham controls or placebo. The outcome measurements included swallowing scales based on clinical and instrumental evaluations.

Results

We included 16 RCTs (620 participants) in the meta-analysis. Overall, sensory stimulation significantly improved ND (n = 17, SMD [95% CI] = 0.80 [0.41, 1.20], p < 0.001; I2 = 71%). Subgroup analysis revealed that the pooled effect size remained significant for electrical stimulation (n = 14, SMD [95% CI] = 0.79 [0.36, 1.23], p < 0.01; I2 = 64%), but not for gustatory stimulation (n = 3, SMD [95% CI] = 0.76 [−1.68, 3.20], p = 0.31; I2 = 90%). The pooled effect sizes for sensory stimulation were significant for both swallowing measurements (n = 14, SMD [95% CI] = 0.75 [0.27, 1.23], p < 0.01; I2 = 76%) and acceleration of decannulation (n = 3, OR [95% CI] = 6.47 [1.10, 38.04], p = 0.05; I2 = 3%).

Conclusion

Oropharyngeal sensory stimulation improves swallowing function and decannulation in ND, with minimal adverse effects. While electrical stimulation shows clear benefits, gustatory effects remain inconclusive. Further studies are warranted to optimize protocols and confirm efficacy.


Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/357836
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 4.8
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.473
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorDai, Meng-
dc.contributor.authorCheng, Ivy-
dc.contributor.authorSasegbon, Ayodele-
dc.contributor.authorLi, Wanqi-
dc.contributor.authorHamdy, Shaheen-
dc.date.accessioned2025-07-22T03:15:15Z-
dc.date.available2025-07-22T03:15:15Z-
dc.date.issued2025-07-08-
dc.identifier.citationCNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics, 2025, v. 31, n. 7-
dc.identifier.issn1755-5930-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/357836-
dc.description.abstract<h3>Background</h3><p>Oropharyngeal sensory stimulation has been applied broadly in clinical dysphagia management, but evidence remains limited.</p><h3>Aims</h3><p>We aimed to determine its effectiveness in treating neurogenic dysphagia (ND).</p><h3>Material and Methods</h3><p>A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using studies from PubMed, EMBASE (via Ovid), CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, searched up to January 2025. We included randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing sensory stimulations, including electrical and gustatory stimulation, with sham controls or placebo. The outcome measurements included swallowing scales based on clinical and instrumental evaluations.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>We included 16 RCTs (620 participants) in the meta-analysis. Overall, sensory stimulation significantly improved ND (<em>n</em> = 17, SMD [95% CI] = 0.80 [0.41, 1.20], <em>p</em> < 0.001; <em>I</em><sup>2</sup> = 71%). Subgroup analysis revealed that the pooled effect size remained significant for electrical stimulation (<em>n</em> = 14, SMD [95% CI] = 0.79 [0.36, 1.23], <em>p</em> < 0.01; <em>I</em><sup>2</sup> = 64%), but not for gustatory stimulation (<em>n</em> = 3, SMD [95% CI] = 0.76 [−1.68, 3.20], <em>p</em> = 0.31; <em>I</em><sup>2</sup> = 90%). The pooled effect sizes for sensory stimulation were significant for both swallowing measurements (<em>n</em> = 14, SMD [95% CI] = 0.75 [0.27, 1.23], <em>p</em> < 0.01; <em>I</em><sup>2</sup> = 76%) and acceleration of decannulation (<em>n</em> = 3, OR [95% CI] = 6.47 [1.10, 38.04], <em>p</em> = 0.05; <em>I</em><sup>2</sup> = 3%).</p><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Oropharyngeal sensory stimulation improves swallowing function and decannulation in ND, with minimal adverse effects. While electrical stimulation shows clear benefits, gustatory effects remain inconclusive. Further studies are warranted to optimize protocols and confirm efficacy.</p>-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherWiley-
dc.relation.ispartofCNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.titleA Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of the Effects of Sensory Modulation Treatments for Neurogenic Oropharyngeal Dysphagia-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_version-
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/cns.70452-
dc.identifier.volume31-
dc.identifier.issue7-
dc.identifier.eissn1755-5949-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:001524087200001-
dc.identifier.issnl1755-5930-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats