Characterizing Dysphagia: Eating Assessment Tool-10 Severity Categories After Cervical Spine Surgery.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 42489449.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1227/neu.0000000000004161.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
This study proposes and assesses the validity of postoperative dysphagia severity categories based on patients' Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) scores and quality-of-life patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) collected before and after cervical spine surgery. A prospectively collected multi-institutional quality registry including 2003 patients was retrospectively reviewed. Patients were categorized based on EAT-10 score severities, with thresholds determined by existing literature and significant differences in PROMs: none (0-2), mild (3-4), moderate (5-15), and severe (16-40). Correlations between EAT-10 severity and established PROMs were assessed at baseline, 3-, and 12-month follow-ups. The Dunn test using Bonferroni adjustment was used to identify differences in PROMs between EAT-10 severities. Multivariate linear regression assessed how EAT-10 severity affects PROMs at baseline, 3-, and 12-month follow-ups. Among 1659 patients with 3-month EAT-10 data, there were 1183 no, 149 mild, 245 moderate, and 82 severe dysphagia patients. Neck Disability Index and EuroQol 5-Dimension scores were significantly different between none vs mild (P < .001; P = .001), mild vs moderate (P < .001; P < .001), and moderate vs severe (P = .035; P = .024) at 3 months. Among 1405 patients with 12-month EAT-10 data, there were 1044 no, 100 mild, 194 moderate, and 67 severe dysphagia patients. Neck Disability Index scores were significantly different between none vs mild (P < .001) and moderate vs severe (P = .004) but not for mild vs moderate (P > .9) at 12 months. EuroQol 5-Dimension scores were significantly different between none vs mild (P = .004) and mild vs moderate (P = .005) but not for moderate vs severe (P = .08). In multivariate regression, EAT-10 severity categories independently predicted worse PROMs at all time points. We propose none (0-2), mild (3-4), moderate (5-15), and severe (16-40) dysphagia categories based on EAT-10 scores. Evidence from univariate and multivariate analyses strengthens the validity of our proposed EAT-10 severity categories, providing statistical justification for their incorporation into clinical practice.