Search

Dysphagia screening tests are useful in identifying possible dysphagia for further evaluation and in supporting feeding recommendations. This study aimed to investigate swallowing parameters in children, while widening the pool of data available, using the '100 ml-Timed Water Swallow Test' (100 ml-TWST). Sixty Singaporean children aged 4 to 18 years old completed the 100 ml-TWST via a cup and a straw. Task completion, presence of cough, choke or throat clear, post-swallow voice quality, total time taken and number of swallows were observed. Subsequently, analysis of time per swallow (T/S), volume per swallow (V/S) and volume per time or swallowing capacity (V/T) were performed. Higher tendencies for coughing and task incompletion were observed in younger participants. A shorter time taken, fewer number of swallows, greater V/S and greater swallowing capacity were observed for adolescent or male participants, or via the mode of cup drinking. These could be due to oropharyngeal structural changes and swallow maturation with age, an increased capacity of oropharyngeal structures for swallowing in adolescent males, and more controlled or paced drinking from a straw. A plateau in time taken, number of swallows and swallowing capacity in adolescence were also observed, possibly indicating an emerging maturation of swallow functions during that period. Interestingly, speed of bolus movement was largely unaffected by age, gender and mode of drinking. Pilot data for children with no dysphagia have been established, while gaining insight into the swallowing parameters and maturation process in the paediatric population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The rise of digitization promotes the development of screening and decision support tools. We sought to validate the results from a machine learning based dysphagia risk prediction tool with clinical evaluation. Methods: 149 inpatients in the ENT department were evaluated in real time by the risk prediction tool, as well as clinically over a 3-week period. Patients were classified by both as patients at risk/no risk. Results: The AUROC, reflecting the discrimination capability of the algorithm, was 0.97. The accuracy achieved 92.6% given an excellent specificity as well as sensitivity of 98% and 82.4% resp. Higher age, as well as male sex and the diagnosis of oropharyngeal malignancies were found more often in patients at risk of dysphagia. Conclusion: The proposed dysphagia risk prediction tool proved to have an outstanding performance in discriminating risk from no risk patients in a prospective clinical setting. It is likely to be particularly useful in settings where there is a lower incidence of patients with dysphagia and less awareness among staff. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Post-stroke dysphagia is highly prevalent and leads to severe complications, such as aspiration pneumonia and malnutrition. Despite the high clinical relevance dysphagia management is heterogeneous and often inadequate. Objective: The aim of this review article is to provide an overview of the diagnostic and treatment strategies for post-stroke dysphagia based on recent studies. Material and methods: Narrative literature review. Results: Dysphagia screening should be performed as early as possible in every stroke patient, e.g., with a simple water swallowing test or a multiconsistency protocol. Subsequently, flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) is indicated in patients with abnormal screening results or existing risk factors for dysphagia. Dietary modifications, oral hygiene measures, and nutritional therapy can help reduce complications. Behavioral swallowing therapy or experimental therapies, such as neurostimulation procedures and pharmacological approaches aim to improve swallowing function and have shown promising results in studies. Conclusion: Timely management of dysphagia is necessary to reduce complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Timed Water Swallow Test (TWST) and the Test of Mastication of Solids (TOMASS) are dysphagia screening procedures that have been shown to be reliably assessed from video. The reliability of the procedures performed over telemedicine has not previously been assessed. TWST and TOMASS outcomes in two situations (both face-to-face and over telemedicine) were compared for 48 participants (aged 60–90; 27 with clinical conditions and 21 older persons). Both testing situation and test performed order were randomized, and all assessment procedures were performed within 3 h of each other. The results indicated a high level of agreement between face-to-face and telemedicine screening outcomes for TWST and TOMASS, respectively. The assessments indicated an 83% and 76% agreement in classifications of individual participants as within or outside normal limits for the TWST and TOMASS for the two test situations. The TWST showed a balanced distribution in differing classification in telemedicine (0.16–0.19 error rates). The TOMASS procedure classified more participants as outside normal limits over telemedicine compared to face-to-face administration. Agreement in the observed number of swallows was substantially lower than other outcome measures, which is attributed to increased difficulty in observing this property over video. Most participants (60%) reported that they would prefer telemedicine over face-to-face assessments, and 90% viewed the procedure as more accessible than expected. All participants were satisfied with the telemedicine procedures. The results suggest that clinical assessment of dysphagia over telemedicine using the TWST and TOMASS are viable alternatives to face-to-face administration of the procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our aim was to validate a Finnish version of the Eating Assessment Tool (F-EAT-10) for clinical use and to test its reliability and validity in a multicenter nationwide study. Normative data were acquired from 180 non-dysphagic participants (median age 57.0 years, 62.2% female). Dysphagia patients (n = 117, median age 69.7 years, 53.0% female) referred to fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) completed F-EAT-10 before the examination and after 2 weeks. Patients underwent the 100-ml water swallow test (WST) and FEES was evaluated using the following three scales: the Yale Pharyngeal Residue Severity Rating Scale, Penetration-Aspiration Scale, and the Dysphagia Outcome Severity Scale. An operative cohort of 19 patients (median age 75.8 years, 57.9% female) underwent an endoscopic operation on Zenker's diverticulum, tight cricopharyngeal muscle diagnosed in videofluorography, or both. Patients completed the F-EAT-10 preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. The cut-off score for controls was < 3 (sensitivity 94.0%, specificity 96.1%) suggesting that ≥ 3 is abnormal. Re-questionnaires for test–retest reliability analysis were available from 92 FEES patients and 123 controls. The intraclass correlation coefficient was excellent for the total F-EAT-10 score (0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.91–0.95). Pearson correlation coefficients were strong (p < 0.001) for each of the questions and the total score. Internal consistency as assessed by Cronbach's alpha was excellent (0.95). Some correlations between findings in FEES and 100-ml WST with F-EAT-10 were observed. The change in subjective symptoms of operative patients paralleled the change in F-EAT-10. F-EAT-10 is a reliable, valid, and symptom-specific patient-reported outcome measure for assessing dysphagia among Finnish speakers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Eating Assessment Tool-10 (EAT-10) is a 10-item patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for dysphagia patients. The objective of this study was to translate and validate the EAT-10Heb and to test for a correlation between its score and residue, penetration and aspiration on Fiberoptic Endoscopic Examination of Swallowing (FEES). 136 patients visiting two specialized dysphagia clinics and undergoing FEES between April 2015 and August 2017, filled the EAT-10Heb. 23 patients refilled the EAT-10Heb during a 2-week period following their first visit. FEES were scored for residue (1 point per consistency, maximum 3 points) and penetration and aspiration (1 point for penetration, 2 points for aspiration per consistency, maximum 6 points). 51 healthy volunteers also filled the EAT-10Heb. Internal consistency and test-retest reproducibility were examined for reliability testing. Validity was established by comparing EAT-10Heb scores of dysphagia patients to healthy controls. The EAT-10Heb score was then correlated with the FEES score. Internal consistency of the EAT-10Heb was high (Cronbach's alpha = 0.925) as was the test-retest reproducibility (Spearman's correlation coefficient = 0.82, p < 0.0001). The median EAT-10Heb score was significantly higher in the dysphagia group compared to healthy controls (13, IQR 7-22 points for dysphagia patients compared to 0, IQR 0-0 points for healthy controls, p < 0.0001). A weak correlation was found between the EAT-10Heb scores and the FEES score (Pearson's correlation coefficient = 0.376, p < 0.0001). While the EAT-10Heb was found to be a reliable and valid PROM, it only weakly correlates with the pathological findings on FEES examination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 3-ounce water swallow test is frequently used to screen individuals for aspiration risk. Prior research concerning its clinical usefulness, however, is confounded by inadequate statistical power due to small sample sizes and varying methodologies. Importantly, research has been limited to a few select patient populations, thereby limiting the widespread generalizability and applicability of the 3-ounce test. The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical utility of the 3-ounce water swallow test for determining aspiration status and oral feeding recommendations in a large and heterogeneous patient population. Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) was performed in conjunction with the 3-ounce water swallow test on 3000 participants with a wide range of ages and diagnoses. A total of 1151 (38.4%) passed and 1849 (61.6%) failed the 3-ounce water swallow test. Sensitivity of the 3-ounce water swallow test for predicting aspiration status during FEES = 96.5%, specificity = 48.7%, and false positive rate = 51.3%. Sensitivity for identifying individuals who were deemed safe for oral intake based on FEES results = 96.4%, specificity = 46.4%, and false positive rate = 53.6%. Passing the 3-ounce water swallow test appears to be a good predictor of ability to tolerate thin liquids. However, failure often does not indicate inability to tolerate thin liquids, i.e., low specificity and high false-positive rate. Use of the 3-ounce water swallow test alone to make decisions regarding safety of liquid intake results in over-referral and unnecessary restriction of liquid intake for nearly 50% of patients tested. In addition, because 71% of participants who failed the 3-ounce water swallow test were deemed safe for an oral diet, nonsuccess on the 3-ounce water swallow test is not indicative of swallowing failure. The clinical utility of the 3-ounce water swallow test has been extended to include a wide range of medical and surgical diagnostic categories. Importantly, for the first time it has been shown that if the 3-ounce water swallow test is passed, diet recommendations can be made without further objective dysphagia testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]