Table 5.

Regression models analyzing associated factors (potential consequences) of oropharyngeal dysphagia among nursing home residents in year 2007 and 2013

Dependent variables	OR (95% confidence interval)
	Adjusted odds ratio for individuals with oropharyngeal dysphagiaa	P value
Clinical signs of aspiration (ref. no)bc	10.89 (8.40–14.12)	< 0.001
Reduced nutritional intaked(ref. no)	1.84 (1.49–2.27)	< 0.001
Artificial nutritione (ref. no)	6.33 (2.73–14.71)	< 0.001
Depression (ref. no)	1.19 (0.99–1.00)	0.063

OR odds ratio

For the logistic regression models the reference categories were: no clinical signs of aspiration, normal nutritional intake, no artificial nutrition, and no indication of severe depression

^aMultivariable models were adjusted for the following confounders: age, sex, year, activity of daily living, and cognition

^bThe model was analyzed with clinical signs of aspiration separated from the overall definition of oropharyngeal dysphagia (the resident has shown difficulty in swallowing and/or clinical signs of aspiration)

^cRefers to misdirected swallowing

^dIndicates reduced nutritional intake in the last three months

^eDefined as either percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube or nasogastric tube feeding