Cargando…

Geschmacksneutrale Andickungsmittel? – Ein kompetitiver Vergleich

BACKGROUND: Thickening of drinks is a standard procedure in dysphagia therapy. Among other things, this adaptive procedure aims to prevent posterior leakage and reduce the demands placed on retarded swallowing reflexes by decelerating boluses. Studies show that taste perception can induce a negative...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schulz, Steffen, Scholz, Veronika, Lehnert, Bernhard
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Medizin 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9329396/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35476148
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00106-022-01161-1
_version_ 1784757910973186048
author Schulz, Steffen
Scholz, Veronika
Lehnert, Bernhard
author_facet Schulz, Steffen
Scholz, Veronika
Lehnert, Bernhard
author_sort Schulz, Steffen
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Thickening of drinks is a standard procedure in dysphagia therapy. Among other things, this adaptive procedure aims to prevent posterior leakage and reduce the demands placed on retarded swallowing reflexes by decelerating boluses. Studies show that taste perception can induce a negative attitude towards thickened fluids in patients. This study investigates whether different thickeners differ in taste. METHODS: The taste of eight arbitrarily chosen thickeners available on the German market were compared by 37 healthy adults. In the test setting, two thickeners combined with water competed against each other. Participants decided which one they preferred. Up to seven pairwise comparisons were performed by each participant. Overall, 224 comparisons were carried out. Based on these results, a relative taste grade was calculated using a probabilistic model and significance tests for differences were performed. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: There are significant differences in taste between the different products, presumably depending on their respective basic ingredients. To respect individual patient’s preferences, different thickeners should be tried out in dysphagia therapy. It remains unclear whether thickeners’ taste differences remain relevant once other liquids such as coffee, tea, or juice are thickened.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9329396
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Medizin
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93293962022-07-29 Geschmacksneutrale Andickungsmittel? – Ein kompetitiver Vergleich Schulz, Steffen Scholz, Veronika Lehnert, Bernhard HNO Originalien BACKGROUND: Thickening of drinks is a standard procedure in dysphagia therapy. Among other things, this adaptive procedure aims to prevent posterior leakage and reduce the demands placed on retarded swallowing reflexes by decelerating boluses. Studies show that taste perception can induce a negative attitude towards thickened fluids in patients. This study investigates whether different thickeners differ in taste. METHODS: The taste of eight arbitrarily chosen thickeners available on the German market were compared by 37 healthy adults. In the test setting, two thickeners combined with water competed against each other. Participants decided which one they preferred. Up to seven pairwise comparisons were performed by each participant. Overall, 224 comparisons were carried out. Based on these results, a relative taste grade was calculated using a probabilistic model and significance tests for differences were performed. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: There are significant differences in taste between the different products, presumably depending on their respective basic ingredients. To respect individual patient’s preferences, different thickeners should be tried out in dysphagia therapy. It remains unclear whether thickeners’ taste differences remain relevant once other liquids such as coffee, tea, or juice are thickened. Springer Medizin 2022-04-27 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9329396/ /pubmed/35476148 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00106-022-01161-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access Dieser Artikel wird unter der Creative Commons Namensnennung 4.0 International Lizenz veröffentlicht, welche die Nutzung, Vervielfältigung, Bearbeitung, Verbreitung und Wiedergabe in jeglichem Medium und Format erlaubt, sofern Sie den/die ursprünglichen Autor(en) und die Quelle ordnungsgemäß nennen, einen Link zur Creative Commons Lizenz beifügen und angeben, ob Änderungen vorgenommen wurden. Die in diesem Artikel enthaltenen Bilder und sonstiges Drittmaterial unterliegen ebenfalls der genannten Creative Commons Lizenz, sofern sich aus der Abbildungslegende nichts anderes ergibt. Sofern das betreffende Material nicht unter der genannten Creative Commons Lizenz steht und die betreffende Handlung nicht nach gesetzlichen Vorschriften erlaubt ist, ist für die oben aufgeführten Weiterverwendungen des Materials die Einwilligung des jeweiligen Rechteinhabers einzuholen. Weitere Details zur Lizenz entnehmen Sie bitte der Lizenzinformation auf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.de (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Originalien
Schulz, Steffen
Scholz, Veronika
Lehnert, Bernhard
Geschmacksneutrale Andickungsmittel? – Ein kompetitiver Vergleich
title Geschmacksneutrale Andickungsmittel? – Ein kompetitiver Vergleich
title_full Geschmacksneutrale Andickungsmittel? – Ein kompetitiver Vergleich
title_fullStr Geschmacksneutrale Andickungsmittel? – Ein kompetitiver Vergleich
title_full_unstemmed Geschmacksneutrale Andickungsmittel? – Ein kompetitiver Vergleich
title_short Geschmacksneutrale Andickungsmittel? – Ein kompetitiver Vergleich
title_sort geschmacksneutrale andickungsmittel? – ein kompetitiver vergleich
topic Originalien
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9329396/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35476148
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00106-022-01161-1
work_keys_str_mv AT schulzsteffen geschmacksneutraleandickungsmitteleinkompetitiververgleich
AT scholzveronika geschmacksneutraleandickungsmitteleinkompetitiververgleich
AT lehnertbernhard geschmacksneutraleandickungsmitteleinkompetitiververgleich