Effect tongue pressure feedback training with enabling education on swallowing and depression in head and neck tumor patients

doi:10.5498/wjp.v15.i8.106019

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 15, Issue 8

This Article

Academic Content and Language Evaluation of This Article

CrossCheck and Google Search of This Article

Academic Rules and Norms of This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Research Domain of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

Total Article Views (0)

All Articles published online

The chart showing PDF series, HTML series, Tables (1-5) series.

Item

Count

PDF

HTML

Tables (1-5)

Sum=0

Aug 19, 2025 (publication date) through Aug 8, 2025

Times Cited of This Article

Times Cited (0)

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Psychiatry

ISSN

2220-3206

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Clinical Trials Study

World J Psychiatry. Aug 19, 2025; 15(8): 106019
Published online Aug 19, 2025. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v15.i8.106019

Table 1 Comparison of general information, n (%)/mean ± SD

General information	Experimental group (n = 55)	Control group (n = 55)	*t/χ²*	P value
Average age (years)	42.64 ± 4.55	43.29 ± 4.65	0.741	0.460
Tumor stage
Stage I	35 (63.64)	38 (69.09)	0.367	0.545
Stage II	20 (36.36)	17 (30.91)
Cancer type
Nasopharyngeal cancer	24 (43.64)	24 (43.64)	1.115	0.773
Oropharyngeal cancer	11 (20.00)	13 (23.64)
Laryngeal cancer	15 (27.27)	11 (20.00)
Others	5 (9.09)	7 (12.73)
SDS score (points)	57.81 ± 2.64	57.60 ± 3.32	0.367	0.714
Treatment method
Radiotherapy	19 (34.55)	21 (38.18)	0.705	0.703
Chemotherapy	18 (32.73)	14 (25.45)
Combined radiochemotherapy	18 (32.73)	20 (36.36)

SDS: Self-rating depression scale.

Table 2 Comparison of depressive symptoms before and after nursing care between the group, mean ± SD

Group	Case	SDS
Group	Case	Before	After
Experimental group	55	57.81 ± 2.64	31.30 ± 1.07^a
Control group	55	57.60 ± 3.32	32.05 ± 1.85^a
t		0.367	2.603
P value		0.714	0.011

^aP < 0.05 vs condition prior to care in this group.

SDS: Self-rating depression scale.

Table 3 Comparison of swallowing function before and after nursing between the groups, mean ± SD

Group	Case	VFSS
Group	Case	Before	After
Experimental group	55	6.02 ± 0.55	2.44 ± 0.54^a
Control group	55	6.01 ± 0.54	2.74 ± 0.59^a
t		0.096	2.782
P value		0.924	0.006

^aP < 0.05 vs condition prior to care in this group.

VFSS: Videofluoroscopic swallowing studies.

Table 4 Comparison of coping methods before and after nursing between groups, mean ± SD

Group	Case	Face		Avoid		Surrender
Group	Case	Before	After	Before	After	Before	After
Experimental group	55	15.88 ± 3.18	26.24 ± 3.07^a	19.12 ± 2.34	12.08 ± 2.48^a	12.14 ± 2.68	8.14 ± 1.05^a
Control group	55	16.10 ± 3.14	22.73 ± 3.66^a	18.78 ± 2.51	15.64 ± 2.64^a	11.97 ± 2.66	9.95 ± 1.18^a
t		0.365	5.449	0.735	7.289	0.334	8.498
P value		0.716	< 0.001	0.464	< 0.001	0.739	< 0.001

^aP < 0.05 vs condition prior to care in this group.

Table 5 Comparison of quality of life before and after care between groups, mean ± SD

Group	Case	Quality of life
Group	Case	Before	After
Experimental group	55	110.34 ± 23.54	168.79 ± 31.25^a
Control group	55	111.28 ± 23.59	148.66 ± 28.46^a
t		0.209	3.532
P value		0.835	0.001

^aP < 0.05 vs condition prior to care in this group.

Citation: Wang JM, Tong TS. Effect tongue pressure feedback training with enabling education on swallowing and depression in head and neck tumor patients. World J Psychiatry 2025; 15(8): 106019
URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2220-3206/full/v15/i8/106019.htm
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5498/wjp.v15.i8.106019