Cited by 98Dysphagia Assessment and ManagementSpinal Cord Injury ResearchVoice and Speech Disorders

Dysphagia in patients with acute cervical spinal cord injury

Wolf, C, Meiners, T H·2003·Spinal Cord

Abstract

Study design Longitudinal observational. Objectives (a) To establish a reliable and feasible method to indicate the presence and severity of dysphagia and (b) to establish a course of treatment in individuals presenting with cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI). Setting Spinal Cord Injury Center, Werner Wicker Klinik, Bad Wildungen, Germany. Patients and methods This is a cross-sectional study of 51 patients consecutively admitted to the Intensive Care Unit of the SCI in-patient service. They were subjected to neurological and fiberoptic endoscopic examination of swallowing (FEES). Data concerning artificial respiration, presence of tracheostomy, oral or non-oral feeding were obtained from the medical charts. Statistics were carried out by a calculation of a nonparametric correlation (Spearman). Results Five levels of dysphagia could be distinguished. At levels 1 and 2, patients presented with a severe impairment of swallowing, in level 3 aspiration was met by a powerful coughing reflex, level 4 comprised a laryngeal edema and/or a mild aspiration of fluids only and at level 5 laryngeal function was not compromised. On admission, 20 patients with CSCI presented with mild (level 4), eight with moderate (level 3) and 13 with severe dysphagia (levels 1 and 2). In 10 no signs of dysphagia could be detected. After treatment, level 1 was no longer detected, one patient showed level 2, two patients showed level 3, all other patients showed only mild or no signs of dysphagia any longer…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/sj.sc.3101440

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?

  • Acute spinal cord injury can be accompanied by transient disturbances of upper gastrointestinal motility, including dysphagia; ileus and acalculous cholecystitis have also been described, particularly after acute cervical injury.

    “Acute spinal cord injury can be accompanied by transient disturbances of upper gastrointestinal motility, including dysphagia; ileus and acalculous cholecystitis have also been described, particularly after acute cervical injury (Wolf et al., 2003).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wolf, C., & Meiners, T. H.
Affiliations
Werner-Wicker-Klinik (DE)
Venue
Spinal Cord
Published
2003-05-13
Volume
41
Issue
6
Pages
347-353
ISSN
  • 1362-4393 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5624
OpenAlex
W2074713189
Cited by
98
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 6 · 2012: 6
FWCI
7.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Spinal Cord (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Speech and Hearing › Dysphagia Assessment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Spinal Cord Injury Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Voice and Speech Disorders
Keywords
dysphagia, cervical spinal cord injury, acute spinal cord injury, aspiration, laryngeal edema, respiratory failure, tracheostomy
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Combined Modality Therapy, Cross-Sectional Studies, Deglutition Disorders, Disability Evaluation, Esophagoscopy, Female, Fluoroscopy, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Neurologic Examination, Ventilators, Mechanical, Severity of Illness Index, Spinal Cord Injuries, Time Factors, Tracheostomy, Reproducibility of Results, Treatment Outcome

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