Table 1.
Participant demographics
Participant | Group | Sex | Age | H & Y | P/A |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 1 | M | 58 | 3 | 1 |
2 | 1 | M | 68 | 3 | 1 |
3 | 1 | M | 61 | 2 | 1 |
4 | 1 | M | 49 | 2.5 | 1 |
5 | 1 | M | 76 | 4 | 1 |
6 | 1 | M | 73 | 2.5 | 1 |
7 | 1 | M | 64 | 2.5 | 1 |
8 | 1 | M | 72 | 2.5 | 1 |
9 | 1 | M | 77 | 2 | 1 |
10 | 1 | M | 78 | 2.5 | 1 |
11 | 2 | M | 72 | 3 | 5 |
12 | 2 | M | 77 | 2.5 | 5 |
13 | 2 | M | 72 | 3 | 3 |
14 | 2 | M | 74 | 3 | 5 |
15 | 2 | M | 78 | 2.5 | 8 |
16 | 2 | M | 70 | 3 | 3 |
17 | 2 | M | 77 | 3 | 2 |
18 | 2 | M | 82 | 3 | 7 |
19 | 2 | M | 67 | 3 | 3 |
20 | 2 | M | 60 | 3 | 5 |
N = 10 in each group. Group 1 consisted of individuals judged to have no videofluorographic evidence of penetration/aspiration and Group 2 consisted of individuals judged to have videofluorographic evidence of penetration/aspiration
H & Y = Hoehn and Yahr score; P/A = Penetration/Aspiration score