Search

Background: Speech and language therapists (SLTs) use videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS) results to manage dysphagia. Yet, in some services only doctors can directly request a VFSS, potentially creating workflow inefficiencies and delaying patient access to VFSS. An alternative model, where SLTs directly refer patients for VFSS, is used in many services in the UK and Australia. However, processes for implementing and sustaining this model have not been reported. Aims: To evaluate the implementation of an SLT‐led inpatient VFSS referring model using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to ascertain implementation barriers, facilitators and critical sustainability factors. Methods & Procedures: This implementation evaluation examined stakeholder perceptions of implementing the SLT‐led VFSS referring model via interviews of (1) SLTs who treat and refer inpatients for VFSS; (2) doctors who manage and refer inpatients for VFSS; (3) radiologists; and (4) trained VFSS referring SLTs. The CFIR was used to prospectively guide implementation planning, evaluation and outcome reporting, regarding barriers, facilitators and sustainability factors. Outcomes & Results: Implementation facilitators were (1) the advantage of SLT‐led VFSS referring over the standard model (doctors referring), in promoting high‐quality VFSS referrals; (2) compatibility of the model with the SLT skill set; (3) supportive communication networks between staff groups; and (4) engaging stakeholders throughout implementation. Adequate availability of trained VFSS referring SLTs was both a barrier and a facilitator of implementation. It was also a critical sustainability factor, along with ongoing staff education and outcome monitoring. Conclusions & Implications: The CFIR supported systematic evaluation of implementation facilitators and barriers, and adjustment of factors critical for implementing and sustaining the new model. Findings may assist other organizations to establish the SLT‐led VFSS referring model. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: Models where SLTs directly refer patients for VFSS have been described in the literature, with evidence of appropriate referrals and adherence to radiation safety standards. However, the process for establishing and sustaining this referring model has not been published. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study describes the process and outcomes of implementing an SLT‐led VFSS referring model, using the CFIR. A key advantage of the new model that facilitated implementation was the improved quality of VFSS referrals compared with the standard referring model. Important facilitating factors in the environment were the compatibility of the model with SLTs' skillset and supportive communication network between doctors and SLTs. Initially, an implementation barrier was the inadequate availability of trained SLT referrers. Using proactive implementation strategies, more referrers were trained (which was a facilitating factor for implementing and sustaining the model). What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: This study highlights that successful implementation requires more than just an effective model. Features of the environment require consideration to minimize barriers and optimize facilitating factors, supported by proactive implementation strategies. Planning and evaluating implementation processes and outcomes using a standardized implementation framework such as CFIR aided understanding of barriers and facilitators for introducing the SLT‐led VFSS referring model. This process may assist other services to implement the model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Videofluoroscopic swallow studies (VFSS) are integral to diagnosing and supporting dysphagia management. However, in many countries, only doctors are authorized to complete medical imaging request forms, in accordance with radiation safety regulations. This can impact workflow and timely access to VFSS. Enhanced scope of practice (ESP) models of care exist, where speech and language therapists (SLTs) are authorized to complete VFSS request forms. However, formal evaluations of these ESP models are currently lacking. Aims: The primary aim of this study was to examine service outcomes regarding the safety and efficiency of SLTs completing VFSS request forms compared with the medical referring model (standard care). The secondary aim was to ascertain the impacts on SLTs' daily workflow and the utility of training for SLTs to complete VFSS requests. Methods & Procedures: The study involved a mixed‐method design. First, referrals completed using standard care versus those completed under the new SLT‐led VFSS referring model were compared for efficiency (days to request completion, number of contacts between staff to complete requests and delay to VFSS appointments) and safety (compliance with radiation safety standards for requests, adverse events and change to dysphagia management to justify radiation exposure). Semi‐structured interviews were then conducted with SLT referrers (n = 7) exploring the impacts of the model on daily workflow and the utility of training. Outcomes & Results: VFSS inpatient requests were examined across a 3‐month period (n = 61 requests) using the standard model, and for 6 months (n = 109 requests) following the introduction of SLT‐led VFSS referring. Regarding efficiency, there was no significant difference between the two models, with most request forms taking less than or equal to 1 day to be completed. Adherence to radiation safety requirements was significantly greater in the SLT‐led VFSS referring model compared with the standard model (p < 0.001) in relation to the overall requisite clinical information being documented on the request forms. No adverse events occurred and 100% of VFSSs led to changed dysphagia management. Interviews of VFSS referring SLTs revealed that completing requests was not complex or onerous, and that the training equipped them well to undertake the role. Conclusions & Implications: The SLT‐led VFSS referring model was feasible for SLTs and resulted in satisfactory efficiency and greater adherence to radiation safety requirements for VFSS request forms than the standard model. Improved information on VFSS request forms provides clearer justification for the radiation procedure and helps optimize the diagnostic yield of VFSS. The evidence supports further widespread adoption of this model. What this paper adds: What is already known on the subject: Models of care permitting selected allied health professionals to refer patients for diagnostic radiology procedures have been established to achieve healthcare efficiencies. Evidence supports the safety and efficiency of physiotherapists referring to radiology. However, limited published outcome data exist regarding models of SLTs referring for radiology procedures, such as VFSS. What this paper adds to existing knowledge: This study describes the implementation of a SLT‐led VFSS inpatient referring model in a quaternary hospital and examines service outcomes. The findings reveal that VFSS request forms completed in the SLT‐led referring model had greater adherence to radiation safety standards compared with the standard referring model. Efficiency was similar across both models and there were no adverse events. Completing VFSS requests did not disrupt daily workflow for SLTs and training was effective preparation for the role. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work?: Results demonstrate that the SLT‐led VFSS referral model can be safely and appropriately implemented in the inpatient setting. Improved quality of information documented on request forms by SLTs increases adherence with radiation safety standards, providing clearer justification for radiation assessments and potentially eliciting more targeted diagnostic information to inform dysphagia treatment planning. These findings may support other hospital services to establish this type of referring model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Workplace training for tracheostomy management is currently recognized to be inconsistent and insufficient. A novel approach, using technology-enhanced simulation, may provide a solution to training tracheostomy management skills by providing a consistent, time-efficient, and risk-free learning environment. The current research evaluated clinicians’ tracheostomy skills acquisition after training in a simulated learning environment and explored changes in clinicians' confidence and perceptions after the experience. Method: Forty-two clinicians with no or low levels of tracheostomy skill attended one of six, 1-day simulation courses. The training involved both part–task skill learning and immersive simulated scenarios. To evaluate clinicians’ acquisition of manual skills, performance of core tasks during the scenarios was assessed by independent observers. Questionnaires were used to examine perceived outcomes, benefits, and perceptions of the learning environment at pre-, post-, and 4 months post-training. Results: Only 1 clinician failed to successfully execute all core practical tasks. Clinicians’ confidence increased significantly (p < .05) from pre- to post-workshop and was maintained to 4 months post-workshop across most parameters. All clinicians reported positive perceptions regarding their learning outcomes and learning in a simulated environment. Conclusion: These findings validate the use of simulation as a clinical training medium and support its future use in tracheostomy competency-training pathways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Workplace training for tracheostomy management is currently recognized to be inconsistent and insufficient. A novel approach, using technology-enhanced simulation, may provide a solution to training tracheostomy management skills by providing a consistent, time-efficient, and risk-free learning environment. The current research evaluated clinicians’ tracheostomy skills acquisition after training in a simulated learning environment and explored changes in clinicians' confidence and perceptions after the experience. Method: Forty-two clinicians with no or low levels of tracheostomy skill attended one of six, 1-day simulation courses. The training involved both part–task skill learning and immersive simulated scenarios. To evaluate clinicians’ acquisition of manual skills, performance of core tasks during the scenarios was assessed by independent observers. Questionnaires were used to examine perceived outcomes, benefits, and perceptions of the learning environment at pre-, post-, and 4 months post-training. Results: Only 1 clinician failed to successfully execute all core practical tasks. Clinicians’ confidence increased significantly (p < .05) from pre- to post-workshop and was maintained to 4 months post-workshop across most parameters. All clinicians reported positive perceptions regarding their learning outcomes and learning in a simulated environment. Conclusion: These findings validate the use of simulation as a clinical training medium and support its future use in tracheostomy competency-training pathways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Purpose: The objective of this study was to prospectively evaluate the validity and reliability of a risk factor model developed for use in predicting dysphagia risk within the first 24h after injury/hospitalisation in patients with thermal burns. Method(s): Three hundred and fifty six patients with thermal burns, with or without inhalation injury, who were consecutively admitted to and received management at a quaternary state-wide burn center over a 12 month period, were included. Patients were reviewed for dysphagia risk by nursing staff using an established set of predictive factors. If risk factors for dysphagia were present, referral to speech-language pathology was initiated to investigate swallow function. Result(s): Of the 356 admissions, 83 patients were identified as meeting one or more risk criteria for dysphagia after burn.Of these, 24.9% (n =30; 8.42% of the total cohort) presented with dysphagia. Using these criteria, sensitivity and specificity for detection of dysphagia risk were high (100% and 83.74%, respectively). The criteria over identify patients who may be at risk of dysphagia and who require dysphagia assessment (positive predictive value=36.14%). However, as a set of predictors of dysphagia risk when thermal burn is the only complaint, a negative result reassures that a patient does not have dysphagia (negative predictive value=100%). Conclusion: Overall, the risk factor model provided a valid measure for predicting dysphagia risk. Incorporating these criteria into a dysphagia screening assessment can ensure an evidence-based pathway for early detection and timely referral to speech-language pathology for patients at risk of dysphagia after thermal burns. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

We explored the feasibility of providing access to specialist speech pathology services via telehealth for patients with head and neck cancer. A weekly telehealth clinic was conducted between the speech pathology departments of a tertiary hospital and a regional hospital in Queensland. Over a 5-month period, 50 telehealth sessions were conducted for 18 patients. There were 38 patient consultations, nine case discussions between clinicians and three clinical training sessions relating to the skills needed for specific client management (e.g. voice prosthesis selection). Eight sessions had multidisciplinary involvement. All cases were successfully managed via telehealth. All patients agreed that they were comfortable using telehealth and would be happy to use it again in future. Both clinicians agreed that they could competently assess patients using the telehealth system. There appeared to be financial benefits for the patient, because by receiving specialist intervention at a local facility their travel expenses were lower. There was also the opportunity for workforce training and development through online case discussion and clinical consultation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]