Forehead against Resistance (FAR): Preliminary Findings from A Clinical Alternative to Shaker’s Type of Exercise
Background. Reduced UES opening is a well-known risk factor for dysphagia. The Shaker exercise and the CTAR are the widely used intervention strategies to bring about effective UES opening. But there are well-known difficulties with the clinical use of these two exercise regimes. The present study p...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2019-01-01
|
| Series: | Gastroenterology Research and Practice |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/9387578 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832545287809269760 |
|---|---|
| author | Radish Kumar Balasubramaniam Rahul Krishnamurthy Athira Rajan Suprasanna K |
| author_facet | Radish Kumar Balasubramaniam Rahul Krishnamurthy Athira Rajan Suprasanna K |
| author_sort | Radish Kumar Balasubramaniam |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background. Reduced UES opening is a well-known risk factor for dysphagia. The Shaker exercise and the CTAR are the widely used intervention strategies to bring about effective UES opening. But there are well-known difficulties with the clinical use of these two exercise regimes. The present study proposes a clinical alternative to Shaker’s exercise and CTAR called the forehead against resistance (FAR) and its variants without altering the central principles of these two regimes. The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy of FAR and its variants in bringing about UES opening. Method. The study used a comparative cross-sectional study design, with the nonrandomized convenient sampling that included 27 healthy adults. MBS was carried out in the anterior-posterior and lateral views, while the participants performed FAR and its variants. The UES diameter was measured in the baseline and with the subjects performing FAR maneuver and its variants. Results. The result revealed that the participants had greater UES opening on FAR and its variant than the baseline swallow. Also, mean values of UES opening were greater for FAR with chin tuck when compared to FAR alone, although there was no significant main effect with exercise. Conclusion. FAR and its variant could be one of the options for increasing UES opening in individuals with dysphagia. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-21e66dc89fad4a8593f5ad467a60c258 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1687-6121 1687-630X |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2019-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Gastroenterology Research and Practice |
| spelling | doaj-art-21e66dc89fad4a8593f5ad467a60c2582025-02-03T07:26:15ZengWileyGastroenterology Research and Practice1687-61211687-630X2019-01-01201910.1155/2019/93875789387578Forehead against Resistance (FAR): Preliminary Findings from A Clinical Alternative to Shaker’s Type of ExerciseRadish Kumar Balasubramaniam0Rahul Krishnamurthy1Athira Rajan2Suprasanna K3Department of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, IndiaDepartment of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, IndiaDepartment of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, IndiaDepartment of Radiodiagnosis, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, IndiaBackground. Reduced UES opening is a well-known risk factor for dysphagia. The Shaker exercise and the CTAR are the widely used intervention strategies to bring about effective UES opening. But there are well-known difficulties with the clinical use of these two exercise regimes. The present study proposes a clinical alternative to Shaker’s exercise and CTAR called the forehead against resistance (FAR) and its variants without altering the central principles of these two regimes. The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy of FAR and its variants in bringing about UES opening. Method. The study used a comparative cross-sectional study design, with the nonrandomized convenient sampling that included 27 healthy adults. MBS was carried out in the anterior-posterior and lateral views, while the participants performed FAR and its variants. The UES diameter was measured in the baseline and with the subjects performing FAR maneuver and its variants. Results. The result revealed that the participants had greater UES opening on FAR and its variant than the baseline swallow. Also, mean values of UES opening were greater for FAR with chin tuck when compared to FAR alone, although there was no significant main effect with exercise. Conclusion. FAR and its variant could be one of the options for increasing UES opening in individuals with dysphagia.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/9387578 |
| spellingShingle | Radish Kumar Balasubramaniam Rahul Krishnamurthy Athira Rajan Suprasanna K Forehead against Resistance (FAR): Preliminary Findings from A Clinical Alternative to Shaker’s Type of Exercise Gastroenterology Research and Practice |
| title | Forehead against Resistance (FAR): Preliminary Findings from A Clinical Alternative to Shaker’s Type of Exercise |
| title_full | Forehead against Resistance (FAR): Preliminary Findings from A Clinical Alternative to Shaker’s Type of Exercise |
| title_fullStr | Forehead against Resistance (FAR): Preliminary Findings from A Clinical Alternative to Shaker’s Type of Exercise |
| title_full_unstemmed | Forehead against Resistance (FAR): Preliminary Findings from A Clinical Alternative to Shaker’s Type of Exercise |
| title_short | Forehead against Resistance (FAR): Preliminary Findings from A Clinical Alternative to Shaker’s Type of Exercise |
| title_sort | forehead against resistance far preliminary findings from a clinical alternative to shaker s type of exercise |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/9387578 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT radishkumarbalasubramaniam foreheadagainstresistancefarpreliminaryfindingsfromaclinicalalternativetoshakerstypeofexercise AT rahulkrishnamurthy foreheadagainstresistancefarpreliminaryfindingsfromaclinicalalternativetoshakerstypeofexercise AT athirarajan foreheadagainstresistancefarpreliminaryfindingsfromaclinicalalternativetoshakerstypeofexercise AT suprasannak foreheadagainstresistancefarpreliminaryfindingsfromaclinicalalternativetoshakerstypeofexercise |