Criterion (Concurrent) Validity and Clinical Utility of the Tongueometer Device

Author:

Krekeler Brittany N.123ORCID,Hopkins Anna1,Tabangin Meredith E.4,Altaye Mekibib4,Roberts Rachel13,Saadi Raneh5,Martin-Harris Bonnie6ORCID,Rogus-Pulia Nicole578ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH

2. Department of Neurology and Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH

3. Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Cincinnati College of Allied Health Sciences, Cincinnati, OH

4. Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital and Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH

5. Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center, William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, WI

6. The Roxelyn and Richard Pepper Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL

7. Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of Wisconsin–Madison

8. Division of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin–Madison School of Medicine and Public Health

Abstract

Purpose: Tongue manometry (i.e., tongue pressure measurement) is a commonly used assessment for patients with suspected oral-motor involvement in swallowing disorders. Availability of lingual manometry has changed in recent years, with the introduction of the Tongueometer device being a more affordable tongue manometry system. The purpose of this study was to test concurrent (criterion) validity of the Tongueometer compared to the current standard reference device, the Iowa Oral Performance Instrument (IOPI). Method: Adults without dysphagia were recruited for participation in this study. Standard lingual measurements (swallowing-related pressures, maximum isometric pressure [MIP], and maximum isometric endurance) were recorded, with the bulb anteriorly placed, with both devices, in a randomized order. The Bland–Altman method was used to determine concurrent (criterion) validity of these measurements compared to the clinical standard IOPI device. A recently available suggested corrective value by Curtis et al. (2023) was also applied, with comparisons made between devices both with and without the Curtis correction. Results: The final sample included 70 adult participants aged 20–89 years ( M age = 52.3 years). Measures with the Tongueometer device were significantly lower when compared with the same measures taken using the IOPI ( p < .01) for all measures including MIP, endurance, and swallow pressures. The correction suggested by Curtis and colleagues did not ameliorate these differences. Conclusions: The Tongueometer lingual measurements were consistently lower compared to the IOPI. Clinical use of values taken with the Tongueometer device should be compared to normative data published for each specific device. Available features of each device (e.g., display, bulb texture, technology/application) should be considered when selecting which device to use with an individual patient.

Publisher

American Speech Language Hearing Association

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3