Many screening tests for dysphagia can be given at bedside. However, they cannot accurately screen for silent aspiration (SA). We studied the usefulness of a cough test to screen for SA and combined it with the modified water swallowing test (MWST) to make an accurate screening system. Patients suspected of dysphagia (N = 204) were administered a cough test and underwent videofluorography (VF) or videoendoscopy (VE). Sensitivity of the cough test for detection of SA was 0.87 with specificity of 0.89. Of these 204 patients, 107 were also administered the MWST. Fifty-five were evaluated as normal by the screening system, 49 of whom were evaluated as normal by VF or VE. Sixteen were evaluated as "SA suspected" by the screening system; seven of them were normal, and seven were evaluated as having SA by VF or VE. Nineteen were evaluated as aspirating with cough, 14 of whom had aspiration with cough as shown by VF or VE. Seventeen were evaluated as having SA, 15 of whom had SA shown by VF or VE. The cough test was useful in screening for SA. Moreover, a screening system that included MWST and a cough test could accurately distinguish between the healthy who were safe in swallowing and SA patients who were unsafe.

Fibroptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) is a useful way for dentists to evaluate oropharyngeal dysfunction. However, no study has paid attention to inter- and intra-rater reliability of FEES evaluation about oropharyngeal dysfunction. The purpose of this study is to verify whether dentist who trained and experienced for evaluation of dysphagia could diagnose oropharyngeal function with FEES. Nine dentists independently evaluated FEES images of 10 cases four times each. At first, evaluators performed the first evaluation without consulting the evaluative criteria. Subsequently, evaluators independently re-evaluated at 1-week intervals for three consecutive weeks, consulting the evaluative criteria. And then, inter- and intra-rater reliability was calculated. Cohen's Kappa was used to assess reliability. The results found that overall inter-rater reliability was 0·35±0·04 (first evaluation), 0·45±0·05 (s), 0·44±0·05 (third) and 0·46±0·04 (fourth). Most of inter-rater reliability related to aspiration was moderate to high, but lower for categories that evaluated timing of swallowing and mastication. In contrast, intra-rater reliability was moderate to high for overall categories, at 0·53±0·04 (first vs. second evaluation), 0·55±0·04 (first vs. third), 0·53±0·04 (first vs. fourth), 0·55±0·03 (second vs. third), 0·60±0·03 (second vs. fourth) and 0·78±0·03 (third vs. fourth). FEES is reliable for experienced dentists to diagnose oropharyngeal function. Moreover, repeated evaluation with the aids of evaluative criteria is useful to improve the reliability of FEES.

Cough test to screen for silent aspiration (SA) was reported, and the effectiveness was excellent. However, the device was rather large so that the portability was poor. So, the purpose of this study is to investigate the usefulness of a handheld nebulizer for the test and verify the reproducibility of the method. The subjects were 160 patients who were suspected of having dysphagia and underwent videofluorography (VF) or videoendoscopy (VE). They inhaled 1.0 % citric acid-physiologic saline orally for 1 min using a handheld nebulizer, and the examiner observed the number of coughs: more than five coughs was considered as negative (normal), while less than four coughs was regarded as positive. Among the subjects, 70 patients administered the cough test and VF or VE twice or more at some intervals. The k coefficient was calculated in reproducibility. Using the results of the VF or VE examination as the standards, for SA detection, the sensitivity was 0.86, specificity was 0.71, positive predictive value was 0.53, and negative predictive value was 0.93. The k coefficient was 0.79. In conclusion, the handheld nebulizer was useful in the cough test to screen for SA. Furthermore, satisfactory reproducibility was shown.

Oral treatment for elderly outpatients with pneumonia is becoming increasingly important in this superaged society from the perspective of cost-effectiveness and limited hospital capacities. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of two oral respiratory quinolones, sitafloxacin and garenoxacin, in elderly patients with pneumonia. This randomized, multicenter, open-label trial was conducted among patients aged !65 years with clinically and radiographically confirmed pneumonia in Japan. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either sitafloxacin (100 mg/day) or garenoxacin (400 mg/day) for 3e10 days. The primary efficacy endpoint was the clinical cure rate at 5e10 days after the end of treatment. From December 2013 to November 2017, we enrolled 120 patients at 11 hospitals and randomly assigned 59 patients to the sitafloxacin group (1 patient withdrew) and 61 patients to the garenoxacin group. These included 30 patients with nursing and healthcare-associated pneumonia (NHCAP) (18 receiving sitafloxacin, 12 receiving garenoxacin) and 37 patients with aspiration pneumonia (16 receiving sitafloxacin, 21 receiving garenoxacin). The clinical cure rates in the sitafloxacin and garenoxacin groups were 88.5% (95% confidence interval: 76.6e95.6) and 88.9% (95% confidence interval: 77.4e95.8), respectively. No significant differences were observed in the incidence rates of drug-related adverse events between the sitafloxacin (20.7%; 12/58 patients) and garenoxacin (27.9%; 17/61 patients) groups. The most common adverse event was hepatic dysfunction, which occurred in seven patients in each group. We conclude

No abstract