Table 4.
Comparison of primary and secondary outcomes between the anti-choking and sham mugs. Values shown are mean ± standard deviation.
| Parameters | Individuals with PD (n = 15) | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anti-choking mug | Sham mug | ||
| Primary outcome | |||
| Neck flexion angle (°) | 26.87 ± 5.13 | 11.93 ± 8.88 | < 0.001* |
| Secondary outcome | |||
| Secondary objective parameters | |||
| Total drinking time (seconds) | 21.17 ± 13.13 | 12.58 ± 11.48 | 0.001* |
| Neutral position | |||
| Chin angle (°) | 65.23 ± 9.28 | 62.6 ± 12.06 | 0.967 |
| Modified lordosis angle (°) | 11.27 ± 2.25 | 11 ± 3.02 | 0.935 |
| AO angle (°) | 16.8 ± 3 | 7.47 ± 6.65 | 0.001* |
| Cervical flexion (°) | 10.2 ± 3.5 | 4.47 ± 3 | < 0.001* |
| Secondary clinical outcome | |||
| SCAS-PD scores | 7.08 ± 13.31 | 49 ± 27.73 | < 0.001* |
Comparison between anti-choking and sham mugs was performed using the Mann–Whitney U test *Significant findings (p-values < 0.05); PD Parkinson’s disease, AO angle axis-occipital angle, SCAS-PD Swallowing Clinical Assessment Score in Parkinson’s Disease.