Screening Instrument for Dysphagia in People with an Intellectual Disability (SD-ID): Quick and Reliable Screening by Caregivers

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities Pub Date : 2023-11-01 DOI:10.1007/s10882-023-09938-0
T. S. van der Woude, R. M. Schüller-Korevaar, A.M. Ulgiati, G.J. Pavlis-Maldonado, J.H.M. Hovenkamp-Hermelink, A.D. Dekker
{"title":"Screening Instrument for Dysphagia in People with an Intellectual Disability (SD-ID): Quick and Reliable Screening by Caregivers","authors":"T. S. van der Woude, R. M. Schüller-Korevaar, A.M. Ulgiati, G.J. Pavlis-Maldonado, J.H.M. Hovenkamp-Hermelink, A.D. Dekker","doi":"10.1007/s10882-023-09938-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background and Aim Timely diagnosis of dysphagia is important for people with an intellectual disability. Periodic screening of each individual by speech-language therapists is barely feasible with respect to limited resources. Therefore, preselection of individuals with an increased dysphagia risk through screening by caregivers is crucial. Objective This study aimed to develop the novel Screening instrument for Dysphagia for people with an Intellectual Disability (SD-ID). Methods The SD-ID was developed, validated and optimised in two rounds. Version 3, consisting of nine risk factors and 20 items concerning eating/drinking behaviour, was thoroughly studied for feasibility, concurrent validity and reliability, and then optimised. Outcomes and Results The SD-ID (version 3) was filled out in an average of four minutes (feasibility). A strong positive association was found between scores on SD-ID and Dysphagia Disorder Survey (concurrent validity). Test-retest and interrater reliability were very good. Two additional risk factors were added and two items removed to yield the final version 4. The most optimal cut-off score appeared to be either 4 or 5. Conclusions and Implications The SD-ID is a reliable instrument to screen for an increased risk of dysphagia in people with an intellectual disability. Ideally it is part of a cyclic work process: Screening with SD-ID (step 1), diagnostic work-up if necessary (step 2), recommendations (step 3), and evaluation (step 4).","PeriodicalId":47565,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-023-09938-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Background and Aim Timely diagnosis of dysphagia is important for people with an intellectual disability. Periodic screening of each individual by speech-language therapists is barely feasible with respect to limited resources. Therefore, preselection of individuals with an increased dysphagia risk through screening by caregivers is crucial. Objective This study aimed to develop the novel Screening instrument for Dysphagia for people with an Intellectual Disability (SD-ID). Methods The SD-ID was developed, validated and optimised in two rounds. Version 3, consisting of nine risk factors and 20 items concerning eating/drinking behaviour, was thoroughly studied for feasibility, concurrent validity and reliability, and then optimised. Outcomes and Results The SD-ID (version 3) was filled out in an average of four minutes (feasibility). A strong positive association was found between scores on SD-ID and Dysphagia Disorder Survey (concurrent validity). Test-retest and interrater reliability were very good. Two additional risk factors were added and two items removed to yield the final version 4. The most optimal cut-off score appeared to be either 4 or 5. Conclusions and Implications The SD-ID is a reliable instrument to screen for an increased risk of dysphagia in people with an intellectual disability. Ideally it is part of a cyclic work process: Screening with SD-ID (step 1), diagnostic work-up if necessary (step 2), recommendations (step 3), and evaluation (step 4).

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
智力残疾者吞咽困难筛查工具(SD-ID):护理人员快速可靠的筛查
背景与目的对智力障碍患者及时诊断吞咽困难具有重要意义。由于资源有限,语言治疗师对每个人进行定期筛查几乎是不可行的。因此,通过护理人员的筛查,预先选择吞咽困难风险增加的个体是至关重要的。目的研制一种适用于智力残疾者吞咽困难的新型筛查仪器。方法分两轮对SD-ID进行研制、验证和优化。版本3由9个危险因素和20个饮食行为条目组成,对其可行性、并发效度和信度进行了深入研究,并进行了优化。SD-ID(版本3)平均填写时间为4分钟(可行性)。SD-ID得分与吞咽困难量表(并发效度)呈显著正相关。重测信度和互测信度都很好。增加了两个额外的风险因素,删除了两个项目,从而产生了最终版本4。最理想的分界点似乎是4分或5分。结论和意义SD-ID是一种可靠的工具,用于筛查智力障碍患者增加的吞咽困难风险。理想情况下,它是循环工作过程的一部分:SD-ID筛查(第1步),必要时诊断检查(第2步),建议(第3步)和评估(第4步)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.60%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: The Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities is an interdisciplinary forum for the publication of original research and clinical reports from a variety of fields serving persons with developmental and physical disabilities. Submissions from researchers, clinicians, and related professionals in the fields of psychology, rehabilitation, special education, kinesiology, counseling, social work, psychiatry, nursing, and rehabilitation medicine are considered. Investigations utilizing group comparisons as well as single-case experimental designs are of primary interest. In addition, case studies that are of particular clinical relevance or that describe innovative evaluation and intervention techniques are welcome. All research and clinical reports should contain sufficient procedural detail so that readers can clearly understand what was done, how it was done, and why the strategy was selected. Rigorously conducted replication studies utilizing group and single-case designs are welcome irrespective of results obtained. In addition, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and theoretical discussions that contribute substantially to understanding the problems and strengths of persons with developmental and physical disabilities are considered for publication. Authors are encouraged to preregister empirical studies, replications, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses in a relevant public database and to include such information with their submission to the journal. Authors are also encouraged, where possible and applicable, to deposit data that support the findings of their research in a public repository (see detailed “Research Data Policy” module in the journal’s Instructions for Authors). In response to the need for increased clinical and research endeavors with persons with developmental and physical disabilities, the journal is cross-categorical and unbiased methodologically.
期刊最新文献
Incorporating Choice: Examining the Beliefs and Practices of Behavior Analysts Working with Individuals with Disabilities Differences in Executive Functioning for children with additional learning needs and Autism Spectrum Disorder or Attachment Disorder Enhancing Assent and Treatment Outcomes: A Case Study on Responding to Aversive Ambient Auditory Stimuli for an Autistic Adult Perspectives of Transition-Aged Youth with Intellectual and/or Developmental Disabilities about Self-Advocacy and Civic Engagement The Use of Multisensory Environments with Individuals with Developmental Disabilities: A Systematic Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1