Trends in GP dispensing of thickeners in the NHS England, 2019-24

2025 · doi:10.1101/2025.09.04.25334883
preprint OA: closed
📄 Open PDF Full text JSON View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated deep summary by claude@2026-07, 2026-07-05 · read from full text ⓘ

This study analysed trends in NHS England GP dispensing of oral thickening agents for oropharyngeal dysphagia from 2019–2024 using the NHS Business Services Authority ePACT2 database, applying descriptive statistics and linear regression to detect changes over time. Nearly three million thickener items were dispensed over the period at a cost of about £90 million, with overall declining dispensing trends in adult populations but an increase in the youngest age group (0–1 years). The authors report that NHS costs rose in the last year studied despite declines in most age groups, and that gum-based products dominated most dispensed items. A key limitation is that the dataset covers only GP dispensed thickeners in England and does not capture other settings. The paper does not explicitly discuss endometriosis or adenomyosis; it was included in the corpus via a keyword match in the upstream search index.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Introduction Oropharyngeal dysphagia is common and often results in aspiration. Thickeners are widely used to thicken liquids to slow the liquid bolus and prevent aspiration and aspiration pneumonia, despite multiple concerns about their use. To date, there is little data on prescribing/dispensing practices. This study aims to provide the first overview of thickener dispensing practices, serve as foundational material for parties interested in research, practice and policy making, and guide further work in this area. Method We explored English general practitioner thickener dispensing practices for the five-year period 2019-2024 via the NHS Business Services Authority ePACT2 database and using descriptive statistics and linear regression to analyse the data. We hypothesized that with a large data set, it would be possible to detect trends in dispensing. for the Results Between 2019 and 2024, nearly three million thickening items were dispensed in primary care in England at a cost of nearly 90 million sterling. Thickened liquids is primarily an intervention for older people although there was a significant decreasing trend in dispensed thickener items in adult populations. Thickener dispensing has increased in the youngest age group (0-1-years-old). The cost of thickeners to the NHS has risen in the last year under study despite the significant decline in use observed for most age groups. Of dispensed items over the five-year period, the vast majority were gum-based. Conclusion While the data provided in this study is limited to GP dispensed thickeners in England, it provides researchers, clinicians and policy makers with initial information on dispensing practices. From the available data, a decreasing dispensing trend is seen in the context of rising costs, older people comprise the population who primarily receive thickeners and gum-based products dominate the market. This study raises a number of questions regarding the use of thickeners for people with swallowing problems.
Full text 3,467 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 4 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Introduction Oropharyngeal dysphagia is common and often results in aspiration. Thickeners are widely used to thicken liquids to slow the liquid bolus and prevent aspiration and aspiration pneumonia, despite multiple concerns about their use. To date, there is little data on prescribing/dispensing practices. This study aims to provide the first overview of thickener dispensing practices, serve as foundational material for parties interested in research, practice and policy making, and guide further work in this area.

Method

We explored English general practitioner thickener dispensing practices for the five-year period 2019-2024 via the NHS Business Services Authority ePACT2 database and using descriptive statistics and linear regression to analyse the data. We hypothesized that with a large data set, it would be possible to detect trends in dispensing. for the

Results

Between 2019 and 2024, nearly three million thickening items were dispensed in primary care in England at a cost of nearly 90 million sterling. Thickened liquids is primarily an intervention for older people although there was a significant decreasing trend in dispensed thickener items in adult populations. Thickener dispensing has increased in the youngest age group (0-1-years-old). The cost of thickeners to the NHS has risen in the last year under study despite the significant decline in use observed for most age groups. Of dispensed items over the five-year period, the vast majority were gum-based.

Conclusion

While the data provided in this study is limited to GP dispensed thickeners in England, it provides researchers, clinicians and policy makers with initial information on dispensing practices. From the available data, a decreasing dispensing trend is seen in the context of rising costs, older people comprise the population who primarily receive thickeners and gum-based products dominate the market. This study raises a number of questions regarding the use of thickeners for people with swallowing problems. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest. Clinical Protocols Funding Statement The author(s) received no specific funding for this work. Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable. Yes Footnotes Consortium This paper is produced by the Swallow Perspectives, Advocacy and Research Collective (SPARC)

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

⚙ Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback ⓘ

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2025) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00