Cargando…
Diagnostic Accuracy of the Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) in Screening Dysphagia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
The Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) is used worldwide to screen people quickly and easily at high risk for swallowing disorders. However, the best EAT-10 cutoff value is still controversial. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we estimated and compared the diagnostic accuracy of EAT-10 c...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9873714/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35849209 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00455-022-10486-6 |
_version_ | 1784877657061588992 |
---|---|
author | Zhang, Ping-ping Yuan, Ying Lu, De-zhi Li, Ting-ting Zhang, Hui Wang, Hong-ying Wang, Xiao-wen |
author_facet | Zhang, Ping-ping Yuan, Ying Lu, De-zhi Li, Ting-ting Zhang, Hui Wang, Hong-ying Wang, Xiao-wen |
author_sort | Zhang, Ping-ping |
collection | PubMed |
description | The Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) is used worldwide to screen people quickly and easily at high risk for swallowing disorders. However, the best EAT-10 cutoff value is still controversial. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we estimated and compared the diagnostic accuracy of EAT-10 cutoff values of 2 and 3 for screening dysphagia. We searched the PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI, WANFANG, and VIP databases from May 2008 to March 2022. The meta-analysis included 7 studies involving 1064 subjects from 7 different countries. Two studies were classified as high quality and five studies as medium quality. With an EAT-10 cutoff value of 2, using flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing or video fluoroscopic swallowing study as the gold standard, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82–0.93), 0.59 (95% CI 0.39–0.77), 2.17 (95% CI 1.38–3.42), 0.19 (95% CI 0.13–0.29), and 11.49 (95% CI 5.86–22.53), respectively. When a cutoff of 3 was used, these values were 0.85 (95% CI 0.68–0.94), 0.82 (95% CI 0.65–0.92), 4.84 (95% CI 1.72–13.50), 0.18 (95% CI 0.07–0.46), and 26.24 (95% CI 5.06–135.95), respectively. Using EAT-10 cutoff values of 2 and 3, the areas under the curve were 0.873 (95% CI 0.82–0.93) and 0.903 (95% CI 0.88–0.93), respectively, showing good diagnostic performance. EAT-10 can be used as a preliminary screening tool for dysphagia. However, a cutoff of 3 is recommended for EAT-10 due to better diagnostic accuracy. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9873714 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98737142023-01-26 Diagnostic Accuracy of the Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) in Screening Dysphagia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Zhang, Ping-ping Yuan, Ying Lu, De-zhi Li, Ting-ting Zhang, Hui Wang, Hong-ying Wang, Xiao-wen Dysphagia Review The Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) is used worldwide to screen people quickly and easily at high risk for swallowing disorders. However, the best EAT-10 cutoff value is still controversial. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we estimated and compared the diagnostic accuracy of EAT-10 cutoff values of 2 and 3 for screening dysphagia. We searched the PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CNKI, WANFANG, and VIP databases from May 2008 to March 2022. The meta-analysis included 7 studies involving 1064 subjects from 7 different countries. Two studies were classified as high quality and five studies as medium quality. With an EAT-10 cutoff value of 2, using flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing or video fluoroscopic swallowing study as the gold standard, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.82–0.93), 0.59 (95% CI 0.39–0.77), 2.17 (95% CI 1.38–3.42), 0.19 (95% CI 0.13–0.29), and 11.49 (95% CI 5.86–22.53), respectively. When a cutoff of 3 was used, these values were 0.85 (95% CI 0.68–0.94), 0.82 (95% CI 0.65–0.92), 4.84 (95% CI 1.72–13.50), 0.18 (95% CI 0.07–0.46), and 26.24 (95% CI 5.06–135.95), respectively. Using EAT-10 cutoff values of 2 and 3, the areas under the curve were 0.873 (95% CI 0.82–0.93) and 0.903 (95% CI 0.88–0.93), respectively, showing good diagnostic performance. EAT-10 can be used as a preliminary screening tool for dysphagia. However, a cutoff of 3 is recommended for EAT-10 due to better diagnostic accuracy. Springer US 2022-07-18 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9873714/ /pubmed/35849209 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00455-022-10486-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Review Zhang, Ping-ping Yuan, Ying Lu, De-zhi Li, Ting-ting Zhang, Hui Wang, Hong-ying Wang, Xiao-wen Diagnostic Accuracy of the Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) in Screening Dysphagia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title | Diagnostic Accuracy of the Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) in Screening Dysphagia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_full | Diagnostic Accuracy of the Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) in Screening Dysphagia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_fullStr | Diagnostic Accuracy of the Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) in Screening Dysphagia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Diagnostic Accuracy of the Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) in Screening Dysphagia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_short | Diagnostic Accuracy of the Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) in Screening Dysphagia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
title_sort | diagnostic accuracy of the eating assessment tool-10 (eat-10) in screening dysphagia: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9873714/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35849209 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00455-022-10486-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhangpingping diagnosticaccuracyoftheeatingassessmenttool10eat10inscreeningdysphagiaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT yuanying diagnosticaccuracyoftheeatingassessmenttool10eat10inscreeningdysphagiaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT ludezhi diagnosticaccuracyoftheeatingassessmenttool10eat10inscreeningdysphagiaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT litingting diagnosticaccuracyoftheeatingassessmenttool10eat10inscreeningdysphagiaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT zhanghui diagnosticaccuracyoftheeatingassessmenttool10eat10inscreeningdysphagiaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT wanghongying diagnosticaccuracyoftheeatingassessmenttool10eat10inscreeningdysphagiaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT wangxiaowen diagnosticaccuracyoftheeatingassessmenttool10eat10inscreeningdysphagiaasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |