Search

Purpose: The early identification of oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) in patients after an acute stroke using non-invasive and easily administered instruments can minimize its consequences and reduce comorbidity and mortality. The Volume-Viscosity Swallow Test (V-VST) is a screening test that makes it possible. The goal of this study is to contribute to the validation of the V-VST European Portuguese (V-VST: EP) version and study the prevalence of safety and efficacy signs in acute stroke patients. Method: The V-VST: EP, its instructions manual and algorithm, was presented to a panel of experts, to assess its content validity. It was applied to 33 acute stroke patients, with signs of OD, to analyze its psychometric properties. Finally, the prevalence of impaired signs of safety and efficacy was analyzed. Results: The V-VST: EP and its instruction manual (content) demonstrate very good agreement values. Most of the results for inter and intra-evaluator reliability presented Cohen’s kappa values higher than 0.60 or 0.80 (75.0%). The concurrent validity (against the 3 OZ wst) presented a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 57.1%. For evaluator 1, the results presented are for the nectar, liquid and pudding consistencies, the prevalence values for the 5 ml, 10 ml and 20ml volume capacity was: impaired lip closure (36%, 39%, 18%), piecemeal deglutition (50%, 50%, 50%), oral residue (7%, 0%, 9%), pharyngeal residue (25%, 17%, 9%) and safe swallowing (89%, 33%, 94%), respectively. Propósito: La identificación temprana de la disfagia orofaríngea (DO) en pacientes después de un accidente cerebrovascular, utilizando instrumentos no invasivos y de fácil administración, puede minimizar sus consecuencias y reducirla comorbilidad y la mortalidad. El examen VolumeViscosity Swallow Test (V-VST) es una prueba de detección que lo hace posible. El objetivo de este estudio es contribuir para la validación del V-VST Versión en portugués europeo (V-VST: EP) y estudio de prevalencia de signos de seguridad y eficacia en pacientes con ictus agudo. Método: Se presentó el V-VST: EP, su manual de instrucciones y algoritmo, a un panel de expertos, para evaluar su validez de contenido. Se aplicó a 33 pacientes con ictus agudo, con signos de DO, para analizar sus propiedades psicométricas. Finalmentese analizó la prevalencia de senales ˜ de deterioro de seguridad y eficacia. Resultados: El V-VST: EP y su manual de instrucciones (contenido) demuestran valores demuy buenaconcordancia. La mayoría de los resultados de confiabilidad inter e intra evaluador presentaron valoreskappa de Cohen superiores a 0,60 o 0,80 (75,0%). La validez concurrente (contra el peso de 3 OZ) presentada una sensibilidad del 100% y una especificidad del 57,1%. Para el evaluador 1, los resultados presentados son para las consistencias de néctar, líquido y budín, los valores de prevalencia para los 5 ml, 10 ml y 20 ml capacidad de volumen fue: deterioro del cierre de los labios (36%, 39%, 18%), deglución fragmentaria (50%, 50%, 50%), residuo oral (7%, 0%, 9%), residuo faríngeo (25%, 17%, 9%) y deglución segura (89%, 33%, 94%), respectivamente. published

Introduction: During the COVID-19 epidemic in Singapore, there was an urgent demand to train more nurses within a short timeframe to perform the Water Swallow Test (WST). The previous training model involved training with actual patients and was time-consuming. Hence, the model was revamped and standardised patients (SPs) were engaged for nurses' training. This study further investigated nurses' feedback about the new training model and compared the efficiency and learner-reported outcomes of the previous and new models. Methods: Nurses who completed WST training from January 2018 to July 2020 were enrolled. Training records were accessed to determine the number of nurses trained under the previous and new models. Nurses were invited to complete post-training evaluation forms and their responses were analysed. Descriptive statistics and the Mann-Whitney U test were used for data analysis. Results: Under the previous model, 52 nurses were trained over 2 years, whereas under the new model, 112 nurses were trained over two months. From the evaluation form responses, the majority of nurses trained under the new model agreed that they achieved the learning objectives and were confident in performing the WST. There was also no significant difference (p>0.05) found between learner-reported outcomes for both training models. Conclusion: Our findings demonstrated that the new model that engaged SPs was more efficient in training more nurses. Nurses were also satisfied with the new training model, which achieved similar learner-reported outcomes as the previous model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Asia Pacific Scholar is the property of Centre for Medical Education (CenMed) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine (a) the agreement between allied health assistants (AHAs) and speech-language pathologists (SLPs) when completing dysphagia screening for low-risk referrals and at-risk patients under a delegation model and (b) the operational impact of this delegation model. Method All AHAs worked in the adult acute inpatient settings across three hospitals and completed training and competency evaluation prior to conducting independent screening. Screening (pass/fail) was based on results from pre-screening exclusionary questions in combination with a water swallow test and the Eating Assessment Tool. To examine the agreement of AHAs' decision making with SLPs, AHAs ( n = 7) and SLPs ( n = 8) conducted an independent, simultaneous dysphagia screening on 51 adult inpatients classified as low-risk/at-risk referrals. To examine operational impact, AHAs independently completed screening on 48 low-risk/at-risk patients, with subsequent clinical swallow evaluation conducted by an SLP with patients who failed screening. Results Exact agreement between AHAs and SLPs on overall pass/fail screening criteria for the first 51 patients was 100%. Exact agreement for the two tools was 100% for the Eating Assessment Tool and 96% for the water swallow test. In the operational impact phase ( n = 48), 58% of patients failed AHA screening, with only 10% false positives on subjective SLP assessment and nil identified false negatives. Conclusion AHAs demonstrated the ability to reliably conduct dysphagia screening on a cohort of low-risk patients, with a low rate of false negatives. Data support high level of agreement and positive operational impact of using trained AHAs to perform dysphagia screening in low-risk patients.

Objective/Hypothesis:The 10-item Eating-Assessment Tool (EAT-10) is a dysphagia screening test. In HNC patients, screening and diagnosis of dysphagia are not well-established. To determine the metrological properties of the EAT-10 compared with videofluoroscopy in non-surgical HNC-patients and to assess the relationship between EAT-10 scores and patients’ self-reported symptoms.Study Design:Prospective cohort study.Methods:Forty-six HNC-patients recently diagnosed and referred to chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Main outcome was evidence of dysphagia according to EAT-10 score, self-perception on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) of impaired swallowing, severity on the Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS), and the Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS). Patients were assessed at baseline, before-CRT, after-CRT, and at 3-month follow-up.Results:A strong baseline correlation between EAT-10, VAS, and FOIS was observed. All 3 values decreased in weeks 6 to 9 after CRT initiation; a poor correlation of EAT-10 with VAS was observed at 3-month follow-up. A receiver operating characteristic curve determined new cut-off points (sensitivity/specificity) for safe swallowing: baseline 3 (86%, 77%); post-CRT, 15 (62.5%, 80%); and 3-month follow-up, 4 (83%, 75%).Conclusions:New safe-swallow EAT-10-points are suggested for this population during screening and the oncological follow-up. A poor correlation between EAT10-score and patient self-reported symptoms was observed at the end-RT and at 3-month follow-up, highlighting the need for an objective evaluation instrument.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity of a dysphagia screening test (DST) in patients who have undergone resection for head and neck cancer (HNC). In addition, we examined whether or not combined effects of DSTs improve the detection accuracy of penetration/aspiration. Thirty-six HNC patients were participated. The DST consisted of the repetitive saliva swallowing test (RSST), the water swallowing test (WST), the modified water swallowing test (MWST), the food test (FT), and tongue pressure. A videofluoroscopic swallowing study was conducted, and the penetration–aspiration scale was used for scoring. For statistical analyses, we used the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Furthermore, the accuracy of the determination of penetration/aspiration was evaluated by combining two or three DSTs. The penetration/aspiration could be predicted with moderate accuracy based on MWST and FT. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) values of the MWST and FT were 0.76 (p = 0.03) and 0.80 (p = 0.050), and the sensitivity/specificity was 0.9/0.61 (MWST) and 0.8/0.8 (FT), respectively. As a result of combining 2 or 3 DSTs, the combination of “MWST and FT” was the most accurate, with an AUC of 0.87 (p = 0.02). The combination of three tests had lower accuracy than the combination of two tests. Based on our results, it is recommended that MWST or FT be used when only one type of DST is performed. In addition, the combination of two DSTs may detect aspiration patients more accurately than one alone.

Introduction Nurses and other nonspecialists in dysphagia are often trained to screen swallowing poststroke. There are many basic tools that test water only, they are usually conservative, and patients that fail the test remain nil by mouth until a speech and language therapy assessment. More comprehensive tests also allow nonspecialists to recommend modified oral intake. Little is known about the accuracy, clinical utility and cost‐effectiveness of these tests. Methods Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted to describe comprehensive swallowing tests that are available for use in acute stroke by nurses or other nonspecialists in dysphagia. A meta‐analysis was performed to evaluate accuracy and the clinical utility of the tests was considered. Searches and analyses, conducted by two reviewers, included MEDLINE, Embase, trial registries and grey literature up to December 2018. Validated studies were assessed for quality and risk of bias using QUADAS‐2. Results Twenty studies were included, describing five different tests, three of which had undergone validation. The tests varied in content, recommendations and use. There was no test superior in accuracy and clinical utility. Three studies validating the Gugging Swallow Screen provided sufficient data for meta‐analysis, demonstrating high sensitivity; 96% (95% CI 0.90–0.99), but low specificity, 65% (95% CI 0.47–0.79), in line with many water swallow tests. Results should be interpreted with caution as study quality and applicability to the acute stroke population was poor. Conclusions There is no comprehensive nurse dysphagia assessment tool that has robustly demonstrated good accuracy, clinical utility and cost‐effectiveness in acute stroke. Relevance to Clinical Practice Nurses and other clinicians can develop competencies in screening swallowing and assessing for safe oral intake in those with poststroke dysphagia. It is important to use a validated assessment tool that demonstrates good accuracy, clinical utility and cost‐effectiveness.

Zusammenfassung Hintergrund Die oropharyngeale Dysphagie ist bei geriatrischen Patienten weit verbreitet und fast immer multikausal bedingt. Sie führt zu schwerwiegenden Komplikationen und wird oft unzureichend detektiert. Alle bekannten und etablierten Screeningmaßnahmen fokussieren sich auf Patienten mit neurologischer Grunderkrankung, insbesondere nach Schlaganfall. Material und Methoden In der Arbeitsgruppe „Dysphagie“ der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Geriatrie (DGG), in der Ärzte, Logopäden und Schlucktherapeuten zusammengeschlossenen sind, erfolgte eine selektive Literaturrecherche zum Dysphagiescreening. Basierend auf Ergebnissen der Literaturrecherche und eigenen Erfahrungen wurde durch eine Konsensgruppe ein neues Screeninginstrument für geriatrische Patienten entwickelt und konsentiert. Ergebnisse Das Screeninginstrument zur Erfassung einer oropharyngealen Dysphagie bei geriatrischen Patienten gliedert sich in 3 Teile: 1. Vigilanz und Sitzposition, 2. Speichelschluck, Zungenbeweglichkeit und Hustenstoß sowie 3. Wasserschlucktest. Das Screeninginstrument kann durch geschultes medizinisches Personal angewendet werden und ist einfach in den Arbeitsalltag zu integrieren. Diskussion Das neu entwickelte Screeninginstrument ist speziell für die Anwendung bei geriatrischen Patienten vorgesehen. Es hat Vorteile gegenüber bisher empfohlenen Screeningtests. Bisherige Erfahrungen zeigen eine gute Praktikabilität und Akzeptanz im geriatrischen Team. Weitere Studien müssen die Validität des Instruments prüfen.

BACKGROUND Dysphagia is a common complication seen in acute ischemic stroke patients, and can lead to morbidity and mortality. As such, quality measures have been instituted to track adherence to dysphagia screening in all stroke patients. In our 217-bed community hospital, we were faced with a low rate in successfully screening for dysphagia. METHODS Quality control interventions were implemented after an analysis of the reasons for dysphagia screening failures was performed. Interventions included online educational sessions for nurses, face-to-face sessions with medical residents, distribution of educational laminated cards, changing the method of documenting the dysphagia screen in our electronic record and others. RESULTS There was an increase of rates of screening for dysphagia from 67% to 91%. CONCLUSION We conclude that failure analysis, implementation of quality control measures to address the cause of failures and re-evaluating success rates periodically was effective to address this problem.

OBJECTIVE: Hospital-acquired aspiration pneumonia remains a rare but potentially devastating problem. The best means by which to prevent aspiration in a cancer hospital population has not been evaluated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of dysphagia screening on aspiration pneumonia rates in an acute care oncology hospital. METHODS: A prospective single-institution quality-improvement dysphagia screening protocol at a comprehensive cancer center. Effect of dysphagia screening implemented in 2016 on hospital acquired aspiration pneumonia rates coded “aspiration pneumonitis due to food/vomitus” were compared with rates from 2014-15, prior to implementation. Screening compliance, screening outcomes, patient demographics, and medical data were reviewed as part of a post hoc analysis. RESULTS: Of 12,392 admissions in 2014-16, 97 patients developed aspiration pneumonia during their hospitalization. No significant change in aspiration pneumonia rate was seen during the dysphagia screening year when compared to prior years (baseline- 7.36 and screening year- 8.78 per 1000 discharges p=0.33). Sixty-eight of the cases (66%) were associated with emesis/gastrointestinal obstruction or perioperative aspiration and only 15 (15%) with oropharyngeal dysphagia. Multivariate analysis found that patients admitted to GI surgery had an aspiration risk equivalent to patients admitted to head and neck, thoracic and pulmonary services (OR 0.65, p= 0.2). DISCUSSION: Nursing-initiated dysphagia screening did not decrease aspiration pneumonia rates. The causes of aspiration-associated pneumonia were heterogeneous. Aspiration of intestinal contents is a more common source of hospital-acquired pneumonia than oropharyngeal dysphagia.

Background Early identification of dysphagia aims to mitigate the risk of health consequences in adults poststroke; however, the evidence from experimental trials alone is inconclusive. This meta‐analysis assessed dysphagia screening benefit from both trial and observational data. Methods and Results Seven electronic databases were searched to December 2019. Unique abstracts and full articles were screened for eligibility by 2 independent blinded raters using a priori criteria and discrepancies resolved by consensus. Included studies were summarized descriptively and assessed for methodological quality using Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Across studies, pooled estimates of health benefit were derived for homogeneous data using Review Manger 5.3. From the yield of 8860 citations, 30 unique articles were selected: 24 observational and 6 randomized trials. Across studies, comparisons varied: no screening versus screening, late versus earlier screening, informal versus formal screening, pre‐ versus postscreening, and pre‐ versus poststroke guidelines that included screening. Pooled estimates across comparisons favored experimental groups for pneumonia odds ratio (OR), 0.57 (95% CI, 0.45–0.72), mortality OR, 0.52 (95% CI, 0.35–0.77), dependency OR, 0.54 (95% CI, 0.35–0.85), and length of stay standardized mean difference, −0.62 (95% CI, −1.05 to −0.20). Conclusions Combining evidence from experimental and observational studies derived a significant protective health benefit of dysphagia screening following adult acute stroke for pneumonia, mortality, dependency, and length of stay.

Background: Nearly two-thirds of acute stroke patients have dysphagia. Dysphagia is difficulty to swallow food or liquids. Early detection of dysphagia is crucial in stroke patients as a result of increased morbidity and mortality due to malnutrition and respiratory tract infections. Aim: Our purpose was to conduct a literature review of dysphagia screening for stroke patient. Methods: We used the bolean operator to search articles of “or” and “and” with the key words were "Dysphagia" or “Screening”, AND "Stroke" or Acute Stroke” AND "Nursing". Data based used were Scopus, Proquest and Science Direct with inclusion criteria using full text in English which published from 2019 to 2021. We obtained 240 articles and then we screened by reading the main focus of articles with paying attention to the topics and the suitability of article content.Result: Twenty five publications relating to dysphagia screening met the inclusion criteria. There are five methods of dysphagia screening performed by nurses or other health workers: 1) a simple Questionnaire Test (4QT) method; 2) Water Swallow Test (WST) method; 3) Bed Side Screening Tool for Dysphagia (BSTD) method; 4) Volume Viscosity Swallow Test (V-VST) method; 5) EAT-10 method.Conclusion: screening is the first step in the identification of swallowing impairment or dysphagia of stroke patient. Dysphagia is an independent predictor of poor patient outcome and prolonged recovery time. Nurse has an important role to conduct a screening and must ensure that the selected tools has high reliability and concurrent validity. Key Words: Dysphagia, Nursing, Screening, Stroke

Introduction: This article summarizes the medical experience in establishing stroke units and systemic thrombolysis in Georgia, which, like many other post-Soviet countries, still faces problems in organizing stroke care even after 30 years of independence. Patients and Methods: We created an example of treating acute stroke with systemic thrombolysis and introduced stroke units in several hospitals in the country, including standardization of the diagnostic and treatment process, consistent evaluation, and monthly feedback to the stroke unit staff. Results: Systemic thrombolysis has become a clinical routine in some large hospitals and is meanwhile reimbursed by the state insurance. The data of consecutive 1,707 stroke patients in 4 major cities demonstrated significant time lost at the prehospital level, due to failure in identifying stroke symptoms, delay in notification, or transportation. The consequent quality reports resulted in a dramatic increase in adherence to the European and national guidelines. A mandatory dysphagia screening and subsequent treatment led to a decrease in pneumonia rates. Discussion: We discuss our experience and suggestions on how to overcome clinical, financial, and ethical problems in establishing a stroke services in a developing country. Conclusion: The Georgian example might be useful for doctors in other post-Soviet countries or other parts of the world.

Introduction: Dysphagia occurs in up to two thirds of stroke patients and can lead to serious complications such as aspiration pneumonia, which is also linked to increased morbidity and mortality. Evidence-based guidelines recommend a bedside dysphagia assessment before oral intake in stroke patients regardless of initial stroke severity. Several studies have described registered nurses’ competency in terms of knowledge and skills regarding dysphagia screening. We aimed to examine the rate of aspiration pneumonia compared to the rate of dysphagia screening. Methods: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data at a single tertiary stroke center was carried out between January 2017 and June 2020. Data comparison was completed utilizing ICD-10 diagnosis codes to identify aspiration pneumonia in ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke patients. The data was reviewed to compare the compliance of a completed dysphagia screen prior to any oral intake to rate of aspiration pneumonia. Chi square tests were used to assess proportion differences in completed dysphagia screen and proportion of aspiration pneumonia diagnosis in the ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke patients. Results: We identified 3320 patient that met inclusion criteria. 67% were ischemic strokes, 22% were intracerebral hemorrhages and 11% were subarachnoid hemorrhages. Compliance with dysphagia screening decreased from 94.2% (n=1555/1650) in 2017-2018 to 74.0% (n=1236/1670) in 2019-2020, OR=0.17 (95%CI 0.14 - 0.22), p < 0.0001. Aspiration pneumonias increased from 58 (3.5%) in 2017-2018 to 77 (4.6%) in 2019-2020, but this difference was not statistically significant, OR=0.75 (95%CI 0.53 - 1.07), p = 0.11. Conclusion: We noted that the decrease in compliance with completing a dysphagia screen in patients with acute stroke prior to any oral intake was associated with a higher trend of aspiration pneumonia.

Introduction: Dysphagia is a common comorbidity after stroke linked to increased morbidity and mortality. Evidence-based guidelines recommend a bedside dysphagia screen before oral intake to reduce the risk of aspiration pneumonia in stroke patients. Prior studies have reviewed barriers to dysphagia screens being completed or documented timely on stroke patients before giving oral intake. Through Lean A3 process, we aimed to improve overall nursing documentation, including dysphagia screen, for stroke patients in the Emergency Department (ED) at an established Primary Stroke Center. Methods: The ED Charge Nurses and the Stroke Coordinator began an A3 project in May 2019 which focused on ED nurse documentation for stroke patients. Data included was 7 months prior to A3 implementation and 8 months post-implementation using Get With The Guidelines quality “Dysphagia Screen” measure. Lean A3 process involved changes to the computer system and re-education of nursing staff in July 2019 by the charge nurses and Stroke Coordinator. The post-A3 measurement period was between August 2019 and March 2020. Chi square tests were used to assess proportion differences in completed dysphagia screen and proportion of meeting or exceeding goal before and after the A3. Results: Overall compliance of patients screened for dysphagia was 87.3% (n = 379/434). After the A3 project, compliance for dysphagia screening was significantly higher than prior to the A3 implementation ((91.9% (n = 228/248) vs. 81.2% (n = 151/186), OR = 2.64 [95%CI 1.47-4.75], p < 0.001). In addition, the 90% goal for dysphagia screen compliance was achieved only 1 month of 7 (14.3%) prior to A3, but was achieved in 6 months of 8 post-A3 (75%), p = 0.04. Conclusion: In conclusion, we found that dysphagia screening documentation by ED nurses improved due to the Lean A3 process improvement project conducted in the ED.

BACKGROUND Simple water-swallowing screening tools are not predictive of aspiration and dysphagia in patients with Parkinson's Disease (PD). We investigated the diagnostic accuracy of a multi-texture screening tool, the Gugging Swallowing Screen (GUSS) to identify aspiration and dysphagia/penetration in PD patients compared to flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES). METHODS Swallowing function was evaluated in 51 PD participants in clinical 'on-medication' state with the GUSS and a FEES examination according to standardized protocols. Inter-rater reliability and convergent validity were determined and GUSS- and FEES-based diet recommendations were compared. KEY RESULTS Inter-rater reliability of GUSS ratings was high (rs = 0.8; p

OBJECTIVES Dysphagia is common in patients with acute ischemic stroke patients (AIS) and it increases the risk of aspiration pneumonia after AIS. The volume-viscosity swallow test (V-VST) is a useful dysphagia screening tool. Therefore, we aim to explore the association between dysphagia (using the modified V-VST) and aspiration pneumonia in acute ischemic stroke patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS All patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) admitted during 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2018 were screened in this study by completing the modified V-VST within 24 hours after admission. The information of aspiration pneumonia was obtained from electronic medical system (EMS) and discharge notes. RESULTS Among 624 AIS patient, there were 152(24.36%) patients who suffered from aspiration pneumonia (95% CI, 20.65% - 27.35%) during hospitalization. Among all of them, patients with both impaired safety and impaired efficacy (HR, 7.53, 95%CI, 3.42-16.58, P < 0.001)) had a higher risk of aspiration pneumonia than those with only safety impaired (HR, 2.38, 95%CI, 1.40-4.04, P < 0.001) or only efficacy impaired (HR, 2.47, 95%CI, 1.33-4.57, P = 0.004). The risk of aspiration pneumonia was also associated with their completed volume at each viscosity. The patients with all impairment of three viscosities were also found to be related to the higher risk of developing aspiration pneumonia (P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS The Modified V-VST is an easy-hand on, reliable screening tool for dysphagia among patients with AIS. Patient subgroup analyses based on the modified V-VST might be able to predict the risk of aspiration pneumonia during hospitalization.

Background and Issues: A common symptom of stroke, dysphagia leaves patients vulnerable to aspiration pneumonia and at risk for poor outcomes, mortality, and increased length of stay and healthcare costs. Evidence-based practice indicates early detection of dysphagia is fundamental in decreasing the risk of aspiration, yet often the opportunity is missed in the process of providing emergent care. Stroke patients should be screened for dysphagia and aspiration risk upon ED arrival using a standardized tool before receiving oral intake. Purpose: The goal was to emphasize early dysphagia screening with a standardized screening tool, achieving ≥ 85% compliance in this high-risk population. Methods: Cause-and-effect analysis was used throughout the improvement initiative. Focus was applied to staff recognition of stroke patients as high risk for dysphagia and associated complications. A standardized screening tool was adopted. Missed screening opportunities were identified, revealing frequent association with time-sensitive medication administration of antithrombotics in the ED. A six month pilot was conducted in the ED; an alert was programmed into the medication dispensing station to query the user regarding patient dysphagia risk when specific antithrombotics were dispensed. Control charts were used to measure compliance. Results: Screening compliance significantly improved more than 23% from 1Q2016 to 1Q2019. The standardized screening tool supported inter-rater reliability. The ED pilot improved compliance to 88%, revealing opportunities to improve screening compliance in acute care units. Conclusions: A standardized screening tool and medication alert in the ED improved dysphagia screen compliance, suggesting similar outcomes if implemented on acute care units. Further data will be valuable to hypothesize a negative correlation between sustained dysphagia screening compliance and decreased incidence of healthcare-associated aspiration pneumonia.

Background: The dysphagia screening in acute ischemic stroke plays an important role in patients with risk of dysphagia. The aim of this hospital-based case-control study is to explore if V-VST, as a new nurse-driven dysphagia screening tool for AIS patients, might help to reduce the rate of post-stroke pneumonia and early withdraw of feeding tube. Methods: 1598 acute ischemic stroke patients were enrolled in this study. The standard protocol in AIS patients were assessed by WST (before intervention and plus with V-VST after intervention). The V-VST assessment were be trained in two senior nurses and all AIS patients were assessed by V-VST during July 1and Dec 30 th , 2017. Among 299 AIS patients with suspected, all clinical data were analyzed. The comparison of their rate of pneumonia in hospital and withdraw rate of tubefeeding before discharge were performed between patients post-intervention (January 1, 2018-June 30, 2019)and those admitted before the intervention (January 1, 2016-June 30, 2017). Results: The baseline characteristics of the pre- and post- intervention AIS groups were similar in age, gender, NIHSS. The implementation of V-VST have a statistically significant reducing the risk of pneumonia with an adjusted HR (0.60, 95% CI 0.43-0.84, P=0.003). Additionally, follow-up V-VST were likely to be associated the withdraw rate of tube-feeding at discharge (29/168 vs 38/131 P=0.016).There is also a trend of length of tube-feeding decreasing (8.32±12.27 vs 6.84±8.61 P=0.241). Conclusion: In our study, the V-VST is a feasible bedside tool. The implemental might be associated with the reduction of post-stroke pneumonia. Therefore, it meets the requirements of a clinical screening test for dysphagia in acute stroke patients at bedside. Large prospective interventional study is needed to confirm our findings. V-VST: Volume-viscosity Swallow Test WST: Water Swallow Test AIS: Acute Ischemic Stroke HR: hazard ratio

Intro: Guidelines advocate screening all acute stroke patients for dysphagia. However, limited data are available regarding how many patients with mild presentation fail initial screening. We sought to evaluate the rates and predictors of dysphagia screening failure in mild acute ischemic stroke patients (NIHSS < 5). Methods: Using GWTG stroke registry data from three large comprehensive stroke centers in the Northeast, South and West, we analyzed 8,687 stroke admissions from 06/2008 - 12/2018. Patients with mild stroke (NIHSS Results: Of the 8,687 patients, 3,614 (41%) had NIHSS < 5. Dysphagia screening failure was seen in 30.2% in the entire cohort while only 10.3% (373/3,614) in patients with NIHSS < 5. Mild stroke patients who failed dysphagia screening were older, more often had stroke risk factors of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, CAD/MI. They had higher median NIHSS and more often had language disturbance on presentation. Patients who failed dysphagia screening were less likely to be discharged home. On MV analysis, age (1.01, 95% 1.00, 1.02), hypertension (1.45, 95% 1.10, 1.91), NIHSS (1.62 95% 1.48, 1.77) and language disturbance at presentation (1.89 95% 1.13, 2.32) were significantly associated with initial dysphagia. Conclusion: Dysphagia screen failure rates are significantly less frequent in patients with mild symptoms and even lower for those with NIHSS of 0-1 at presentation. Factors associated with failure - older age, higher NIHSS and language disturbance at presentation may help focus efforts to avoid complications in these patients who might otherwise do well. This focused approach of screening patients all patients but targeting mild patients with dysphagia may hold potential for improved outcomes.

Background An increased number of elderly people in the world may lead to an increase in the incidence of stroke, which creates a burden on the country's healthcare system. Dysphagia is the most common post stroke. Screening of dysphagia in stroke patients is serious to prevent complication linked to aspiration and inadequate hydration/nutrition. Objective This literature review aimed to discuss registered nurses' competency to screen dysphagia among stroke patients. Methods The keywords used were nurse's competency; dysphagia; dysphagia screening; and stroke. These keywords were entered into multiple electronic databases including CINAHL, Medline, Science Direct, Pro Quest, Pub Med, and Wiley Online Library. Aliterature search was conducted for the period2005 to 2016.Results:Seventeen studies were identified by a systematic search ofthe literature.Two parts created the body of this literature review. The first part covers the literature on the training nurses in screening dysphagia among stroke patients and benefits of screening. The second part covers nurse's competency in terms of knowledge and skills of screening dysphagia among stroke patients. Conclusion Because the nurses have more contact with the patient, they are most likely to observe dysphagia. It is important that formal dysphagia screening protocols are routine nursing care that requires special training to practice. Trained nurses should assess their competency in terms of knowledge and skills via well-developed tool.

The topic of dysphagia screening has garnered substantial attention in the research literature, in conference proceedings, and on various professional forums, including the SIG 13 Community page. A...

Background and purpose The Gugging Swallowing Screen (GUSS) is a tool to screen aspiration risk in acute stroke. We aimed to replicate its validity in a larger second cohort of patients with acute stroke, including the more severe with a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) ≥ 15. Methods In a prospective, double-blind design, the GUSS was validated with the Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing scale. Patients were categorized into different stroke severities as assessed by the NIHSS, and the diagnostic properties were calculated separately for each subgroup. Results A total of 100 patients with acute stroke were evaluated consecutively at a mean 1.7 ± 2.2 days after stroke. With the GUSS cut-off value of 14 points, the GUSS screened aspiration risk with a 96.5% sensitivity and 55.8% specificity (area under the curve, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.67–0.84), which corresponded well with the original publication. In the NIHSS < 5 group, the sensitivity and specificity levels were 71.4% and 88.8%, respectively. In the NIHSS ≥ 15 group, these levels changed to 100% and 20%, respectively. The high failure rate in completing the first part of the GUSS in the latter group was related to the low specificity. Diet recommendations following the GUSS were more conservative than those after Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing. In particular, the GUSS overestimated the need for nasogastric tube feeding. Conclusions This is the first time that a swallowing screening tool for patients with acute stroke has been revalidated in a larger population from another stroke center. The validity of a swallow screening test may vary according to different stroke severities.

The large majority of the available dysphagia screening tools has been developed for the stroke population. Only few screening tools are suitable for heterogeneous groups of patients admitted to a subacute care unit. The Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital (RBWH) dysphagia screening tool is a nurse-administered, evidence-based swallow screening tool for generic acute hospital use that demonstrates excellent sensitivity and specificity. No Italian version of this tool is available to date. The aim of this study was to determine the reliability and screening accuracy of the Italian version of the RBWH (I-RBWH) dysphagia screening tool. A total of 105 patients consecutively admitted to a subacute care unit were enrolled. Using the I-RBWH tool, each patient was evaluated twice by trained nurses and once by a speech and language pathologist (SLP) blind to nurses' scores. The SLP also performed standardised clinical assessment of swallowing using the Mann assessment of swallowing ability (MASA). During the first and the second administration of the I-RBWH by nurses, 28 and 27 patients, respectively, were considered at risk of dysphagia, and 27 were considered at risk after SLP assessment. Intra- and inter-rater reliability was satisfactory. Comparison between nurse I-RBWH scores and MASA examination demonstrated a sensitivity and specificity of the I-RBWH dysphagia screening tool up to 93% and 96%, respectively; the positive and negative predictive values were 90% and 97%, respectively. Thus, the current findings support the reliability and accuracy of the I-RBWH tool for dysphagia screening of patients in subacute settings. Its application in clinical practice is recommended.La maggior parte dei test di screening per la disfagia è stato sviluppato per essere utilizzato in pazienti con stroke. Solo pochi strumenti risultano applicabili a popolazioni più eterogenee di pazienti, come quelli ricoverati nelle unità di cure per Sub-acuti. Tra questi, il Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital (RBWH) dysphagia screening tool è stato concepito per essere utilizzato da personale infermieristico e possiede un’eccellente sensibilità e specificità. Al momento non è disponibile una versione italiana di questo strumento. Scopo del lavoro è di analizzare l’affidabilità e l’accuratezza nello screening della versione italiana del RBWH (I-RBWH) dysphagia screening tool. A tal fine sono stati arruolati 105 pazienti, tutti ricoverati presso l’unità di cure Sub-acute. Ogni paziente è stato valutato con il I-RBWH dysphagia screening tool da personale infermieristico (per due volte) e da una logopedista. Quest’ultima, non solo era all’oscuro dei risultati ottenuti durante la valutazione infermieristica, ma ha anche eseguito una valutazione standardizzata delle abilità deglutitorie utilizzando il Mann Assessment of Swallowing ability (MASA). L’affidabilità intra- e inter-rater si sono rilevate soddisfacenti. Il confronto tra i risultati ottenuti dal personale infermieristico durante la somministrazione del I-RBWH e i punteggi del MASA hanno dimostrato un’eccellente sensibilità (93%), specificità (96%), valore predittivo positivo (90%) e valore predittivo negativo (97%). Questi dati supportano l’affidabilità e l’accuratezza del I-RBWH dysphagia screening tool nello screening della disfagia nei pazienti ricoverati nelle unità di cure per Sub-acuti. Il suo utilizzo in clinica è pertanto raccomandabile.

Three facilities, involved in introducing a model of Allied Health Assistant (AHA) delegated dysphagia screening, examined barriers and facilitators to service implementation. The 3 facilities varied in size, services and location. AHAs (n = 4) and speech-language therapists (SLTs; n = 4) directly involved in implementation at each site completed semi-structured interviews exploring the implementation experience. Analysis was guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). There was differential implementation across the sites. Facilitators to implementation fell within the CFIR Innovation Characteristic domain, with the “relative advantage” of the model and “design, quality and packaging” of the training and implementation resources being key facilitators. Barriers related to the Innovation Characteristic domain, regarding the tool’s “adaptability” in terms of screening tools selected and the implementation environment. Issues with the Inner Setting domain, specifically the “structural characteristics,” the “compatibility” of the model and the “relative priority” of the model’s implementation within other organizational priorities were also barriers. Although the service model was perceived to have relative advantage, compatibility with local work-flow priorities and service needs must be thoroughly considered if AHA delegated dysphagia screening is to be beneficial as a service model to address increasing dysphagia referral demands.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONDysphagia is a disabling condition which may result in medical, social and operational complications.The demands of screening, assessing, managing and providing rehabilitation for dysphagia are increasing, therefore alternative models of service delivery including delegation are increasingly being considered and implemented.This study provides evidence regarding the context and facilitators of successful AHA dysphagia screening model implementation.This evidence contributes to a growing knowledge base of delegation practices for the management of staffing resources and building of capacity for rehabilitation service delivery. Dysphagia is a disabling condition which may result in medical, social and operational complications. The demands of screening, assessing, managing and providing rehabilitation for dysphagia are increasing, therefore alternative models of service delivery including delegation are increasingly being considered and implemented. This study provides evidence regarding the context and facilitators of successful AHA dysphagia screening model implementation. This evidence contributes to a growing knowledge base of delegation practices for the management of staffing resources and building of capacity for rehabilitation service delivery.

Background & Aim: There is a high incidence of dysphagia after stroke that, depending on the assessment, methodology and time elapsed, can range from 8.1% to 80%. Early and systemic dysphagia screening is associated with a decreased risk of aspiration pneumonia and prevents inadequate hydration/nutrition. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify dysphagia screening tools for acute stroke patients available for nurses validated against reference test. The research question was: which dysphagia screening tools for acute stroke patients available for nurses? Methods & Materials: Three electronic databases were searched from January 2007 to November 2017: on PubMed, Scielo and CINAHL Plus. Two independent reviewers screened all titles and abstracts, assessed methodological quality and extracted data. The methodological quality analysis and evaluation was guided according to four domains: patient selection, index test, reference standard and flow and timing. Divergences between reviewers in data extraction were consensualized through discussion. Results: From the 377 articles retrieved, only three articles met criteria for review: Barnes-Jewish Hospital-Stroke Dysphagia Screen; the Gugging Swallowing Screen and, The Toronto Bedside Swallowing Screening Test. None of the screening tools complies with all psychometric properties, which means that a still significant proportion of patients will be kept nil by mouth without being necessary or that some patients will “fall through the cracks” interrupting the diagnostic process. The tools identified are different from each other, making their comparison impracticable. Conclusion: Due to psychometric proprieties and dietary recommendations adjusted to dysphagia severity, of all available tools, GUSS is a suitable screening tool for nurses in clinical practice.

Introduction: Dysphagia occurs in roughly 30 to 67% of stroke patients and can lead to significant complications, including aspiration with subsequent pneumonia. There has been a lack of agreement on a single effective dysphagia screening tool. The tool used in our institution was developed internally based on extensive literature review, and includes dysphagia screening items followed by a water challenge. Hypothesis: We suspected this dysphagia screening tool was performing well based on low rates of aspiration pneumonia in our stroke patients. The purpose of this study was to validate the dysphagia screening tool against gold standard video fluoroscopy (VF). Methods: This was a prospective study to determine the sensitivity and specificity of the dysphagia screening tool. Our enrollment goal was 300 patients with suspected ischemic stroke between December 2016 and January 2018. The primary nurse completed the routine dysphagia screen, and the sub-investigator performed a blinded simultaneous screen, followed by VF evaluation. We used a group sequential design with interim analyses every 30 patients to allow for early stopping. The primary hypothesis was sensitivity >85%, evaluated using a one-sided test of proportion at a study alpha level of 0.025. Results: At the second interim analysis, 34/61 patients were positive for dysphagia on VF, while only 19 were positive on the screening tool. Estimated sensitivity was 55.9% (95% CI 39.5-71.1%), with a p-value below the second-stage threshold of 0.000002. Therefore, we terminated the study at this point. Estimated specificity was 51.9% (95% CI 34.0-69.3%), and the concordance between examiners for dysphagia screening as 91.8%. Conclusions: This is a routinely used screening tool across multiple hospitals within this organization. The tool did not show adequate sensitivity or specificity compared against the gold standard. Despite the results, we continue to have low rates of aspiration pneumonia. It is possible that VF may overestimate dysphagia, or that subjective interpretation of dysphagia criteria with VF may complicate the results. In conclusion, due to inadequate sensitivity and specificity of the dysphagia screening tool, we terminated the study and recommended modification of the tool.

Background and Issues: A hospital in a Chicago suburb struggled with inconsistent dysphagia screening and National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) assessment upon admission for patients coding out as a confirmed stroke patient. Percentage of compliance for dysphagia and NIHSS were, in 2014, 79% and 84%, respectively. Purpose: The purpose of this Quality Improvement (QI) Project Abstract was to increase the number of stroke patients assessed for dysphagia and NIHSS upon admission. Methods: A sample size of approximately 90 patients over a three month period was used to identify admission diagnoses of patients that were not assessed for dysphagia and NIHSS upon arrival but did code out for stroke. D izziness, A ltered mental status, a trial fibrillation, W eakness and S yncope were the five diagnoses consistently utilized. It was recognized that patients admitted with these diagnoses needed to be routinely assessed. To help staff remember these five diagnoses, an acronym ( DAaWS ) was developed. Communication to staff of the new DAaWS acronym and practice began in 2015 and consisted of visual learning tools, staff meeting discussions, just-in-time learning, rounding to influence and 1:1 education. Results: Data from 2013 showed an average NIHSS at 90% / dysphagia at 76%. 2014 showed an average NIHSS at 84% / dysphagia at 79%. Implementation year of DAaWS practice, 2015 showed an average NIHSS at 91% / dysphagia at 94%. 2016 showed an average NIHSS at 97% / dysphagia at 90%. 2017 showed an average NIHSS at 96% / dysphagia at 84%. Of note is the 15% improvement of dysphagia from year 2014 to 2015 when the DAaWS practice began. Implementation of DAaWS had less impact on the NIHSS compliance in the initial year of 2015 with an increase of 7%. Subsequent years of 2016/2017 have seen an average increase in compliance of 12.5% from the 2014 data. Conclusion: In conclusion, the study showed that implementing a catchy acronym, DAaWS, to assist the nurse with early identification of potential stroke patients significantly improved the compliance of the dysphagia screening & NIHSS assessment upon admission.

Background and Issues: Prior to this project, an internally created dysphagia screen had been used. A validated stroke dysphagia screen was needed. Knowledge deficits existed on who, when, and how to perform the screen. With record patient census, stroke patients got admitted wherever there was an open bed, so all units needed this education. Evidence also showed that swallowing issues were related to aspiration. Purpose: Evaluate the impact of expanded education and use of a validated stroke dysphagia screen on core measure compliance and hospital acquired pneumonia incidence on stoke/TIA patients. Methods: An interprofessional team selected the validated, stroke dysphagia screen. Education was provided via an online module, tipsheets, and live demonstrations. More resources and demonstration videos were made available on the internal stroke program website. All inpatient stroke/TIA patients were monitored for core measure compliance at least 4 days/week, with real time follow-up to involved nurses as needed. The stroke core measure of dysphagia screening compliance and documentation of hospital-acquired aspiration pneumonia was entered into a database for 100% of the coded stroke/TIA patients during the study periods (i.e. July-December over 2 years: Baseline= 2016 and Intervention=2017). Results: More than 2000 nurses attended the live presentations and/or completed the online module. Compliance and outcome findings were as follows: Conclusions: Though no direct cause and effect with the pneumonia results can be proven with this quality improvement effort, favorable findings occurred. The percentage of stroke/TIA patients being screened went up and the percentage of those patients developing hospital acquired pneumonia went down after the screening tool change, education, and monitoring process were put into place.

Aim: The aim of the study was to investigate the inter-rater agreement (IRA) of the 8-item Brief Bedside Dysphagia Screening Test-Revised (BBDST-R). Design: An observational IRA study was conducted. Methods: Forty-six patients with stroke were independently assessed by two nurse raters using the BBDST-R. Rater agreement was described and analysed using descriptive statistics, Cohen's kappa (κ), the proportion of observed agreement (Po), the prevalence index (pindex), and the bias index (bindex). Results: Kappa ranged from -0.046 (p = 0.641; 95% CI = -0.126-0.034) for item "ability to clench the teeth" to 0.784 (p < 0.001; 95% CI = 0.377-1.000) for "thick liquid: cough". For the overall BBDST-R result, κ was 0.241 (p = 0.114; 95% CI = 0.000-0.558). The Po was ≥ 0.80 for five items; the pindex was ≥ 0.80 for three items. The bindex ranged from 0.03-0.31. Conclusion: The IRA, as expressed by κ, was low for the overall result and variable for the individual items. However, for some items, κ may have misrepresented the IRA due to the high pindex and bindex. Several strategies are recommended to improve the IRA of the instrument. This should enhance the instrument's capacity to produce consistent results across raters.

Introduction: Dysphagia screening tools have been routinely used to assess for risk of aspiration in the stroke population. Despite a 30 to 40% prevalence rate of oropharyngeal dysphagia in older g...

Aim Dysphagia is a common and potentially serious problem in patients with neurological conditions. In many countries, dysphagia screening is used, which contributes to better patient outcomes. In Greece, the implementation of dysphagia screening has not yet been described. The aim was to examine the effectiveness of an educational session delivered to Greek masters-level nursing students and their faculty on the correct use of an 8-item nursing dysphagia screening instrument developed in the Czech Republic. Methods Fifteen students and nursing faculty members of the Technological Educational Institute of Athens were enrolled in this descriptive pilot study. They were educated on dysphagia in a session consisting of a theoretical and practical part and a discussion. The participants were asked to indicate their clinical experience with dysphagia and their opinion on the importance of nurses’ involvement in dysphagia assessment. Their knowledge of the screening procedure and interpretation and documentation of the result was tested using a hypothetical patient case. Results In this study, 4 (27%) participants had prior experience with patients with dysphagia. All of them thought that nurses’ involvement in dysphagia assessment was very important . Slightly more than half of the participants identified, interpreted, and documented all of the 8 item results correctly. Conclusion The participants were motivated to learn, however, complete mastery of the assessment technique was not achieved. The learning experience was affected by several issues that were unique to Greece, and the participants’ efforts focused on understanding how the new knowledge and skills could affect their daily practice. Direct ongoing support in the clinical setting could be beneficial.

Aim Dysphagia is common in dependent older adults. Thus, a method of evaluating eating and swallowing functions that can be used to diagnose and manage dysphagia in a simple and robust manner is required. In 2002, the Mann Assessment of Swallowing Ability (MASA) was introduced to identify dysphagia in acute-stage stroke patients. As the MASA enables easy screening, it might also be applicable to dependent older adults if appropriate MASA cut-off values and the most useful assessment items could be determined. In the present study, we attempted to determine suitable MASA cut-off values, and the most useful assessment items for predicting aspiration and pharyngeal retention in dependent older adults. Methods Using the MASA, we evaluated the eating and swallowing functions of 50 dependent older adults with dysphagia. All of the patients also underwent videoendoscopic-based swallowing evaluations to detect aspiration and pharyngeal retention. The participants' characteristics and the utility of each assessment item were compared between various groups. Using the patients' videoendoscopic findings as a reference, receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was carried out to determine appropriate cut-off values for predicting aspiration and pharyngeal retention in dependent older adults. Results The optimal MASA cut-off values for predicting aspiration and pharyngeal retention were 122 points and 151 points, respectively. A total of 17 of the 24 clinical items assessed by the MASA were found to be associated with aspiration in dependent older adults. Conclusions The MASA is a useful screening tool for evaluating eating and swallowing functions in dependent older adults. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2017; 17: 561-567.

Dysphagia following stroke lesions is common and can result in severe complications ranging from malnutrition to mortality. Aspiration of material into the airways in severe dysphagia can increase the risk of aspiration pneumonia. Early identification and screening procedures are important and should be performed in the stroke ward in compliance with National Institute of Health and Care Excellence guidelines. Further formal assessment of dysphagic patients performed by specialist speech and language therapists is imperative. This article reviews the dysphagia screening and assessment procedures carried out in UK stroke wards.

Dysphagia may become a threatening condition if not diagnosed and treated at an early stage. Healthcare professionals require simple, rapid, and reliable tools for the immediate evaluation of dysphagia in their daily clinical practice. The aim of the present study was the translation and validation of the “Brief Bedside Dysphagia Screening Test-Revised (BBDST-R)” tool in the Greek language in a sample of patients with neurological disorders. The present study was designed as a cross-sectional study conducted with a convenience sample of 80 patients. The BBDST-R tool contains eight items, and a positive response to an item implies that the patient might have dysphagia. The bedside assessment using the BBDST-R tool was conducted by a researcher previously trained for the tool usage. The translation and validation were conducted by following the relevant international standards. The researcher’s final assessment concerning the presence or absence of dysphagia was compared to the medical diagnosis as determined by a physician, which was set as a benchmark. The evaluation of BBDST-R was conducted by researching its diagnostic accuracy according to the guidelines for measures of diagnostic accuracy. Internal consistency was determined through Cronbach’s Alpha. The English version of the BBDST-R tool has been reliably translated into the Greek language. The prevalence of dysphagia in our sample was 62.5% (95% CI: 50%-72%). The observed high sensitivity [Sen = 98%/87%-99% (95% CI)] and high negative predictive value [NPV = 89%/77%-95% (95% CI)] indicated high validity of the screening tool at the acceptable levels of > 75% even for 95% CI. Cronbach’s Alpha internal consistency index for the 8 items of this tool presented an almost excellent value of 0.859. The results of the present study indicated that BBDST-R is a reliable and valid tool for application in the assessment of dysphagia in patients admitted in Greek hospitals and community-based individuals.

Purpose: There are no examples in the literature of successful long-term hospital-wide implementation of nurse-led dysphagia screening. This article aims to describe strategies used to implement hospital-wide dysphagia screening in a large acute tertiary teaching hospital in Australia. It reports on compliance, accuracy and nursing staff satisfaction using the validated Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital Dysphagia Screening Tool (RBWH DST). Method: A retrospective observational study of audit data was conducted to examine hospital-wide compliance and accuracy of dysphagia screen completion. A nursing staff survey measured staff satisfaction. Implementation included: (1) utilisation of validated tool (RBWH DST); (2) key stakeholder engagement and strong governance; (3) policy development; (4) education; and (5) review and monitoring processes. Result: Audits conducted over a 9-year period (n = 3726) showed an average hospital-wide compliance rate of 74% and an accuracy rate of 82%. A nurse satisfaction survey (n = 109) showed high levels of satisfaction associated with using the RBWH DST. Conclusion: The RBWH DST was implemented in a large acute tertiary teaching hospital with acceptable compliance and accuracy rates and favourable nursing staff satisfaction. Further study is required to objectively evaluate patient health and cost benefits associated with using the RBWH DST.

The early detection of dysphagia, a common clinical issue among older adults, is important. However, healthcare professionals sometimes experience difficulties in applying the current screening tools to older adults. Therefore, we developed the Easy Dysphagia Symptom Questionnaire (EDSQ), a simplified tool for the older adults, and investigated its reliability and validity. The 12-item “yes/no” EDSQ assesses dysphagia symptoms, with a total score being the sum of all “yes” responses. Each item was determined by consensus of three physiatrists after reviewing the previous dysphagia questionnaires. Participants were aged 65 years or older who either complained of or were suspected by a physician of facing swallowing disturbance. They completed the EDSQ, modified water swallow test (MWST), and videofluoroscopic swallowing study. The EDSQ’s internal consistency was assessed. Correlations between the EDSQ total score and the MWST, American Speech–Language–Hearing Association’s National Outcome Measurement System (ASHA NOMS) swallowing scale, and videofluoroscopic dysphagia scale (VDS) were analyzed. The sample comprised 51 participants (29 male, 56.9%; mean age 76.7 ± 6.6 years). Mean EDSQ total score was 4.33 ± 3.03 (range 0–12). Regarding the EDSQ’s reliability, the Cronbach’s α coefficient was 0.785. The EDSQ total score correlated with the MWST (r = − 0.468, p = 0.001), ASHA NOMS swallowing scale (r = − 0.635, p

In the article by Smith et al, “Effect of Dysphagia Screening Strategies on Clinical Outcomes After Stroke: A Systematic Review for the 2018 Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke,” …

The purpose of this project was to improve dysphagia-screening processes in a tertiary Veterans Affairs Medical Center. The dysphagia-screening tool was redesigned on the basis of frontline clinician feedback, clinical guidelines, user satisfaction, and multidisciplinary expertise. The revised tool triggered a speech-language consult for positive screens and demonstrated higher scores in user satisfaction and task efficiency. Systems redesign processes were effective for redesigning the tool and implementing practice changes with clinicians involved in dysphagia screening.

Background and Purpose: During implementation of an acute stroke program, areas in need of improvement were observed, including dysphagia screening, appropriate intervention and documentation. An interdisciplinary team, including a Speech Language Pathologist (SLP), selected the Yale Swallow Protocol to be used by the bedside nurse to screen patients with stroke symptoms. The Yale Swallow Protocol is a validated tool for dysphagia screening. The purpose of this project was to validate the effectiveness of using interdisciplinary collaboration to sustain the utilization of an evidence-based dysphagia screening protocol. Methods: Patient’s presenting with stroke symptoms are to receive a dysphagia screen within 24 hours of hospital arrival. Screening results are then to be documented in the Electronic Medical Record (EMR). Patient data abstraction revealed inconsistent application of the Yale Swallow Protocol. The interdisciplinary team then developed a training tool focused on the protocol. The SLP utilized this tool to train nurses on the protocol, appropriate intervention and documentation. Patient dysphagia screening data abstraction from the patient EMR was tabulated to include the percentage of completed documentation. The goal was a minimum average of 90% for four months. The benchmark is set by Joint Commission’s evidence of standards compliance - measures of success. Results: The results demonstrated sustained improvement. Eight months prior to intervention, the average dysphagia screen documentation was 85% of 203 patients. The first 3 months’ post intervention the average rate of documentation was 93% of 91 patients. The next 5 months’ post intervention demonstrated sustained and improved compliance with the average documentation at 97% of 133 patients. With a total 8-month cumulative average of 96% of 224 patients. Conclusions: In conclusion, the positive patient data trend demonstrates the continual utilization of the screen post intervention. Utilizing interdisciplinary collaborative efforts will yield results that are sustainable when continual awareness and educational efforts are deliberate and ongoing.

Background: Patients with stroke and other comorbidities are at risk for dysphagia and aspiration. Aspiration pneumonia is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Get with the Guidelines-Stroke recommends that stroke patients undergo dysphagia screening with a validated, evidence-based bedside testing protocol, approved by the hospital, prior to any oral intake. Dysphagia screening is also mandatory for any patient presenting with a stroke or transient ischemic attack per The Joint Commission guidelines, and may increase early identification in other populations. The dysphagia screen used within the health system’s acute care hospitals was not a validated tool. Purpose: The purpose of this evidence-based practice project was to determine which validated dysphagia screening tool best identifies hospitalized adult patients at risk for dysphagia and aspiration? Methods: The Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence Based Practice Model was used for the evidence appraisal and synthesis. A thorough review of the evidence was conducted in multiple databases using keywords dysphagia, dysphagia screen*, and aspiration pneumonia. The evidence was reviewed by a system-wide interprofessional team. Articles were excluded if the screen was not validated in multiple populations or was not administered by nurses. Results: Sixteen articles were included in the evidence synthesis. Sources of evidence with consistently good quality were found. The 3-ounce water test was most frequently used in the published studies. The Yale Swallow protocol incorporating the 3-oz water study was widely researched for the stroke and general patient populations and is administered by multiple disciplines including nurses. The Yale swallow protocol is pass or fail with 96.5 sensitivity and 97.9 specificity if passed. Conclusions: Based on evidence synthesis, the Yale Swallow Protocol was determined to be a valid and reliable tool that met the test of applicability and feasibility for implementation throughout the health system. A recommendation for change was presented and fully endorsed by the health system’s stroke and pneumonia clinical effectiveness teams and nursing practice council. The tool was implemented after staff education and training was completed.

Introduction: Dysphagia screening protocols have been recommended to identify patients at risk for aspiration. The American Heart Association convened an Evidence Review Committee to systematically review evidence for the effectiveness of dysphagia screening protocols to reduce the risk of pneumonia, death, or dependency after stroke. Methods: The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched on November 1, 2016, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing dysphagia screening protocols or quality interventions to increased dysphagia screening rates, and reporting outcomes of pneumonia, death or dependency. Results: Three RCTs were identified. One RCT (n=1,126) found that a combined nursing quality improvement intervention targeting fever and glucose management as well as dysphagia screening reduced death and dependency (42% vs. 58%, p=0.002), but without reducing the pneumonia rate (2.1% vs. 2.7%, p=0.82). Another RCT (n=311) failed to find evidence that pneumonia rates were reduced by adding the cough reflex test to routine dysphagia screening (26% vs. 21%, p=0.38). A smaller RCT (n=162) randomly assigned 2 hospital wards to a stroke care pathway including dysphagia screening or regular care, and found that patients on the stroke care pathway were less likely to require intubation and mechanical ventilation (7.8% vs. 20%, p=0.03 after adjustment); however, the study was small and at risk for bias. Conclusions: There were insufficient RCT data to determine the effect of dysphagia screening protocols on reducing rates of pneumonia, death, or dependency after stroke. Additional trials are needed to compare the validity, feasibility, and clinical effectiveness of different screening methods for dysphagia.

Clinical evaluation, both instrumental and noninstrumental, plays an important role in the swallowing assessment of the patients with dysphagia. The gathered information from thorough evaluation contributes the presence of dysphagia, dysphagia severity level, rehabilitation planning, and both the problem and the potential solution. The dysphagia screening, clinical and instrumental assessment, and new perspectives in advanced swallowing assessment will be described in this chapter.

In der Akutphase leiden 2/3 aller Schlaganfallpatienten an einer Schluckstörung. Dies führt zu Komplikationen wie Aspiration und Pneumonie. Weiters zeigt sich ein Zusammenhang zwischen Schluckstörungen und einer höheren Anzahl an Belagstagen, einer höheren Wahrscheinlichkeit[zum vollständigen Text gelangen Sie über die oben angegebene URL], Brücken bauen – von der Evidenz zum Patientenwohl; 19. Jahrestagung des Deutschen Netzwerks Evidenzbasierte Medizin

Background: While there is recognition about the importance of dysphagia screens in stroke patients, there is limited data on the concordance rates of dysphagia screens performed by neuroscience-trained nurses and speech language pathologist (SLPs). Hypothesis: Neuroscience nurses and SLPs will have high concordance rates when assessing stroke patients with dysphagia screens. Methods: From March 1, 2016 through May 31, 2016 a random sample of stroke patients underwent a dysphagia screening by neuroscience nurses and subsequently by SLPs within 24 hours using the same tool, a 2-part screen assessing for contraindications and using the 3-ounse water swallow test. Results of the dysphagia screens were retrospectively collected to identify concordance rates. Results: During the study period, 98% of stroke patients underwent dysphagia screening prior to oral intake. Of 50 stroke patients evaluated by neuroscience nurses and SLPs, only 26 patients (52%) demonstrated concordance with pass or fail results. Of 33 patients who were administered the water test and passed the dysphagia screen based on the neuroscience nursing assessment, 20 patients (61%) were determined by SLPs evaluation to have dysphagia and 11 (33%) of these patients had had overt aspiration. Conclusions: Current metrics on dysphagia screening do not identify the efficacy of dysphagia screening among stroke patients. Stroke centers who utilize bedside nurses to perform initial dysphagia screens should evaluate concordance rates with SLPs. A multidisciplinary team including Clinical Nurse Specialists, SLPs, and Nursing IT specialists have implemented measures (hospital wide re-education of nursing staff and optimizing the electronic dysphagia screening form) to improve concordance rates among nurses and SLPs. A post-intervention follow-up study of concordance rates among neurosciences and SLPs is underway.