Purpose: Chewing problems are a major and prevalent issue in populations with neurological pathologies including cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and Parkinson’s disease (PD). We measured habitual solid chewing performance in patients with CVA or PD and compared it to that of normal older adults to identify differences in chewing ability between groups. Methods: Measures of habitual solid chewing in 32 patients with CVA, in 35 patients with PD, and in 217 normal older adults were compared. Data on the chewing duration, frequency, and rate were collected using a solid chewing task (SCT). We also analyzed the relationships between dentures, number of teeth, and SCT outcomes. Results: The chewing duration in the PD group was significantly longer than the normal group (p<0.05). Chewing frequency and rate were not significantly different among the three groups. Results can be explained by rigidity and bradykinesia in orofacial structures in the PD group. No significant differences between the PD and CVA groups may be partly explained by the diverse location and size of the CVA lesion compared to the PD. Dentures and the number of teeth were not significantly correlated with SCT outcomes. Conclusions: Chewing impairment remains the area of development for research and rehabilitation, and SCT may help to assess oropharyngeal dysphagia and to identify therapeutic interventions.
Purpose: Chewing problems are a major and prevalent issue in populations with neurological pathologies including cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and Parkinson’s disease (PD). We measured habitual solid chewing performance in patients with CVA or PD and compared it to that of normal older adults to identify differences in chewing ability between groups. Methods: Measures of habitual solid chewing in 32 patients with CVA, in 35 patients with PD, and in 217 normal older adults were compared. Data on the chewing duration, frequency, and rate were collected using a solid chewing task (SCT). We also analyzed the relationships between dentures, number of teeth, and SCT outcomes. Results: The chewing duration in the PD group was significantly longer than the normal group (p<0.05). Chewing frequency and rate were not significantly different among the three groups. Results can be explained by rigidity and bradykinesia in orofacial structures in the PD group. No significant differences between the PD and CVA groups may be partly explained by the diverse location and size of the CVA lesion compared to the PD. Dentures and the number of teeth were not significantly correlated with SCT outcomes. Conclusions: Chewing impairment remains the area of development for research and rehabilitation, and SCT may help to assess oropharyngeal dysphagia and to identify therapeutic interventions.
INTRODUCTION METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION CONCLUSIONS
