Dehydration among Long-Term Care Elderly Patients with Oropharyngeal DysphagiaLeibovitz A. · Baumoehl Y. · Lubart E. · Yaina A. · Platinovitz N. · Segal R.
Shmuel Harofe Hospital, Geriatric Medical Center, affiliated with the Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
Do you have an account?
- Rent for 48h to view
- Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
- Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
- Printing and saving restrictions apply
Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00
Article / Publication Details
Introduction: Long-term care (LTC) residents, especially the orally fed with dysphagia, are prone to dehydration. The clinical consequences of dehydration are critical. The validity of the common laboratory parameters of hydration status is far from being absolute, especially so in the elderly. However, combinations of these indices are more reliable. Objective: Assessment of hydration status among elderly LTC residents with oropharyngeal dysphagia. Methods: A total of 28 orally fed patients with grade-2 feeding difficulties on the functional outcome swallowing scale (FOSS) and 67 naso-gastric tube (NGT)-fed LTC residents entered the study. The common laboratory, serum and urinary tests were used as indices of hydration status. The results were considered as indicative of dehydration and used as ‘markers of dehydration’, if they were above the accepted normal values. Results: The mean number of dehydration markers was significantly higher in the FOSS-2 group (3.8 ± 1.3 vs. 2 ± 1.4, p = 0.000). About 75% of these FOSS-2 patients had ≧4 dehydration markers versus 18% of the NGT-fed group (p = 0.000). A low urine output (<800 ml/day) was significantly more common in the FOSS-2 group (39 vs. 12%, p = 0.002). Above normal values of blood urea nitrogen (BUN), BUN/serum creatinine ratio (BUN/SCr), urine/serum osmolality ratio (U/SOsm), and urine osmolality UOsm, were significantly more frequent in the dehydration-prone FOSS-2 group. This combination of 4 indices was present in 65% of low urine output patients. In contrast, it was present in only 36% of the higher urine output patients (p = 0.01). Patients with a ‘normal’ daily urine output (>800 ml/day) also had a significant number (2 ± 1.5) of positive indices of dehydration. Conclusions: Dehydration was found to be common among orally fed FOSS-2 LTC patients. Surprisingly, probable dehydration, although of a mild degree, was not a rarity among NGT-fed patients either. The combination of 4 parameters, BUN, BUN/SCr , U/SOsm and UOsm, offers reasonable reliability to be used as an indication of dehydration status in daily clinical practice.
© 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / DisclaimerCopyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.