Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 265

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Economic and survival burden of dysphagia among inpatients in the United States

Open access
Patel, D A, Krishnaswami, S, Steger, E, Conover, E, Vaezi, M F, Ciucci, M R, Francis, D O·2018·Diseases of the Esophagus

Abstract

The inpatient burden of dysphagia has primarily been evaluated in patients with stroke. It is unclear whether dysphagia, irrespective of cause, is associated with worse clinical outcomes and higher costs compared to inpatients with similar demographic, hospital, and clinical characteristics without dysphagia. The aim of this study is to assess how a dysphagia diagnosis affects length of hospital stay (LOS), costs, discharge disposition, and in-hospital mortality among adult US inpatients. Annual and overall dysphagia prevalence, LOS, hospital charges, inpatient care costs, discharge disposition, and in-hospital mortality were measured using the AHRQ Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) National Inpatient Sample (2009-2013). Patients aged 45 years or older with ≤180 days of stay in hospital with and without dysphagia were included. Multivariable survey regression methods with propensity weighting were used to assess associations between dysphagia and different outcomes. Overall, 2.7 of 88 million (3.0%) adult US inpatients had a dysphagia diagnosis (50.2% male, 72.4% white, 74.6% age 65-90 years) and prevalence increased from 408,035 (2.5% of admissions) in 2009 to 656,655 (3.3%) in 2013. After inverse probability of treatment weighting adjustment, mean hospital LOS in patients with dysphagia was 8.8 days (95% CI 8.66-8.90) compared to 5.0 days (95% CI 4.97-5.05) in the non-dysphagia group (P < 0.001). Total inpatient costs were a mean $6,243 higher among those with dysphagia diagnoses ($19,244 vs. 13,001, P < 0.001). Patients with dysphagia were 33.2% more likely to be transferred to post-acute care facility (71.9% vs. 38.7%, P < 0.001) with an adjusted OR of 2.8 (95% CI 2.73-2.81, P < 0.001). Compared to non-cases, adult patients with dysphagia were 1.7 times more likely to die in the hospital (95% CI 1.67-1.74). Dysphagia affects 3.0% of all adult US inpatients (aged 45-90 years) and is associated with a significantly longer hospital length of stay, higher inpatient costs, a higher likelihood of discharge to post-acute care facility, and inpatient mortality when compared to those with similar patient, hospital size, and clinical characteristics without dysphagia. Dysphagia has a substantial health and cost burden on the US healthcare system.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/dote/dox131

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 29 references

Cited by

See all 265

Metadata

Authors
Patel, D. A., Krishnaswami, S., Steger, E., Conover, E., Vaezi, M. F., Ciucci, M. R., & Francis, D. O.
Venue
Diseases of the Esophagus
Published
2017-11-16
Volume
31
Issue
1
Pages
1-7
ISSN
  • 1120-8694 (ISSN-L)
  • 1442-2050
OpenAlex
W2768205776
Cited by
265
References
29
FWCI
26.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Economic and survival burden of dysphagia among inpatients in the United States. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/dote/dox131
The paper
Patel, D. A., Krishnaswami, S., Steger, E., Conover, E., Vaezi, M. F., Ciucci, M. R., & Francis, D. O. (2018). Economic and survival burden of dysphagia among inpatients in the United States. Diseases of the Esophagus. https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/dox131

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.