Cited by 80Dysphagia Assessment and ManagementVoice and Speech DisordersHead and Neck Cancer Studies

Physiologic Model of Oropharyngeal Swallowing Revisited

Martin‐Harris, Bonnie, Michel, Yvonne, Castell, Donald O.·2005·Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery

Abstract

Objective: The purposes of this investigation were to determine whether the temporal onsets of swallow events segment into oral and pharyngeal phases, to test the interdependence of temporal onsets of swallow events, and to determine the influence of age on total swallow duration. Study Design and Setting: The onsets of swallowing and respiratory measures were studied in 76 healthy normal individuals. Results: Confirmatory factor analysis revealed a 2‐factor solution but did not support the hypothesized 2‐phase structure (ie, oral and pharyngeal). Two of the onsets, apnea onset and apnea offset, formed a single factor that explained 12.6% of the variation among the 11 onset times. The other 9 onsets formed a second factor that explained 66.4% of the variation. Age accounted for modest variation in total swallow duration. Conclusions: The two factors, oropharyngeal and respiratory, explained 79% of the variation among the 11 onset times. Significance: This finding speaks to the overlap between the initiation of oral and pharyngeal components of swallowing in adults and highlights the artificiality of separating the swallowing continuum into isolated phases.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.otohns.2005.03.059

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Previous exploratory factor analysis of temporal components of swallowing yielded only one 'oropharyngeal' factor due to interdependency of structural movement onsets.

    “It has been demonstrated that when the onsets of temporal components of swallowing are subjected to exploratory factor analysis, only one factor (“oropharyngeal”) resulted because of the interdependency of the onset of one structural movement with another [65].”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 19 · Cited by 80

Authors
Martin‐Harris, B., Michel, Y., & Castell, D. O.
Affiliations
Medical University of South Carolina (US)
Corresponding author
Martin‐Harris, Bonnie
Venue
Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-08
Volume
133
Issue
2
Pages
234-240
ISSN
  • 0161-6439 (ISSN-L)
  • 0194-5998
  • 1097-6817
OpenAlex
W1970808188
Cited by
80
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
FWCI
16.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Otolaryngology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R03DC004864, K23DC005764, 1 K23 DC 5764, R03 DC-04864)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Dysphagia Assessment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Voice and Speech Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Otorhinolaryngology › Head and Neck Cancer Studies
Keywords
oropharyngeal swallowing, swallowing phases, respiratory events
MeSH terms
Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Deglutition, Female, Fluoroscopy, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Oropharynx, Probability, Reference Values, Regression Analysis, Sensitivity and Specificity, Sex Factors, Time Factors, Cohort Studies, Multivariate Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review