Exploring speech–language pathologists’ training and use of topical nasal anaesthesia during laryngeal endoscopy in the United States

IF 1.5 3区 医学 Q2 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders Pub Date : 2024-12-13 DOI:10.1111/1460-6984.13140
Meredith L. Baker-Rush, Michelle Zemsky Dineen, Erin T. Kaseda
{"title":"Exploring speech–language pathologists’ training and use of topical nasal anaesthesia during laryngeal endoscopy in the United States","authors":"Meredith L. Baker-Rush,&nbsp;Michelle Zemsky Dineen,&nbsp;Erin T. Kaseda","doi":"10.1111/1460-6984.13140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Speech–language pathologists (SLPs) perform nasal laryngoscopy (LE) to assess voice and dysphagia-related disorders. The procedural aspects may include the use of topical nasal anaesthesia.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p>To explore the practice patterns of American Speech–Language–Hearing Association (ASHA)-certified SLPs use of anaesthesia during laryngeal endoscopy procedures in the United States</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods &amp; Procedures</h3>\n \n <p>Data were collected via a brief computerized survey. A mixed methodology was employed. National representation across the United States was achieved.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Outcomes &amp; Results</h3>\n \n <p>Limited pre-licensure training in LE with the majority of educational content embedded in a voice course (64.7%) and post-academic training via live continuing education (CE) (58.8–72.5%). Pharmacology training was notably lacking in pre- and post-licensure groups. A total of 50% of post-licensure training occurred via interprofessional (IP) mentorship with significant correlations (LE confidence and skills <i>r</i> = 0.64, &lt; 0.001, anaesthesia <i>r</i> = 0.74, &lt; 0.001). However, when looking at confidence of knowledge as compared with skills for the procedure, 83% of participants reported high levels of confidence in their knowledge, yet 31.25% reported high levels of confidence in the skills to perform LE. Conversely, when looking at confidence of anaesthesia knowledge (20.83%) as compared with skills, participants were less confident in their knowledge yet more confident in the skills (31.25%) to administer anaesthesia.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions &amp; Implications</h3>\n \n <p>Bandura's Social Cognitive Learning Theory of 1986 with standardized use of vicarious and self-regulatory capabilities based on prior experiences and the use of IP mentorship during pre- and post-licensure education for LE may be beneficial in training. Limitations and suggestions for future research are additionally reported.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS</h3>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> What is already known on this subject</h3>\n \n <div>\n <ul>\n \n <li>Laryngeal endoscopy is an advanced competency procedure completed by SLPs used in the evaluation and treatment of voice and swallowing disorders. Standards for competency lack consistency. Simultaneously, topical nasal anaesthesia may be a component of some exams, yet training and, subsequently, competency is inconsistent. Education and training for use of anaesthesia and navigating potential complications is not a required element of graduate training for SLPs. While SLPs may be independent practitioners of the laryngeal endoscopy procedure, it is unclear if they, or others, are administering the anaesthesia within an IP practice model.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> What this study adds to the existing knowledge</h3>\n \n <div>\n <ul>\n \n <li>Laryngeal endoscopy is comparatively new within the field of SLP. There are no studies investigating the knowledge, skills, and practice patterns of SLPs related to the use of anaesthetic agents during such procedures. This study adds to the literature regarding the practices of a sample of SLPs in the United States regarding use of topical anaesthesia during flexible laryngeal endoscopy, their training in topical anaesthesia and use/barriers of IP teams during flexible laryngeal endoscopy. Initial insight relative to the variability of training and practice is documented with potential learning needs for SLPs related to pharmacology, patient safety and IP practice.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> What are the practical and clinical implications of this work?</h3>\n \n <div>\n <ul>\n \n <li>This study offers considerations for SLP graduate and postgraduate training in the areas of topical nasal anaesthesia use and laryngeal endoscopy procedures. The results show variability in training for completion of these exams which may contribute to patient safety and outcomes. Promoting an IP approach to care, specifically roles and responsibilities related to use of anaesthesia, may further benefit those we serve.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":49182,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders","volume":"60 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1460-6984.13140","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Speech–language pathologists (SLPs) perform nasal laryngoscopy (LE) to assess voice and dysphagia-related disorders. The procedural aspects may include the use of topical nasal anaesthesia.

Aims

To explore the practice patterns of American Speech–Language–Hearing Association (ASHA)-certified SLPs use of anaesthesia during laryngeal endoscopy procedures in the United States

Methods & Procedures

Data were collected via a brief computerized survey. A mixed methodology was employed. National representation across the United States was achieved.

Outcomes & Results

Limited pre-licensure training in LE with the majority of educational content embedded in a voice course (64.7%) and post-academic training via live continuing education (CE) (58.8–72.5%). Pharmacology training was notably lacking in pre- and post-licensure groups. A total of 50% of post-licensure training occurred via interprofessional (IP) mentorship with significant correlations (LE confidence and skills r = 0.64, < 0.001, anaesthesia r = 0.74, < 0.001). However, when looking at confidence of knowledge as compared with skills for the procedure, 83% of participants reported high levels of confidence in their knowledge, yet 31.25% reported high levels of confidence in the skills to perform LE. Conversely, when looking at confidence of anaesthesia knowledge (20.83%) as compared with skills, participants were less confident in their knowledge yet more confident in the skills (31.25%) to administer anaesthesia.

Conclusions & Implications

Bandura's Social Cognitive Learning Theory of 1986 with standardized use of vicarious and self-regulatory capabilities based on prior experiences and the use of IP mentorship during pre- and post-licensure education for LE may be beneficial in training. Limitations and suggestions for future research are additionally reported.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on this subject

  • Laryngeal endoscopy is an advanced competency procedure completed by SLPs used in the evaluation and treatment of voice and swallowing disorders. Standards for competency lack consistency. Simultaneously, topical nasal anaesthesia may be a component of some exams, yet training and, subsequently, competency is inconsistent. Education and training for use of anaesthesia and navigating potential complications is not a required element of graduate training for SLPs. While SLPs may be independent practitioners of the laryngeal endoscopy procedure, it is unclear if they, or others, are administering the anaesthesia within an IP practice model.

What this study adds to the existing knowledge

  • Laryngeal endoscopy is comparatively new within the field of SLP. There are no studies investigating the knowledge, skills, and practice patterns of SLPs related to the use of anaesthetic agents during such procedures. This study adds to the literature regarding the practices of a sample of SLPs in the United States regarding use of topical anaesthesia during flexible laryngeal endoscopy, their training in topical anaesthesia and use/barriers of IP teams during flexible laryngeal endoscopy. Initial insight relative to the variability of training and practice is documented with potential learning needs for SLPs related to pharmacology, patient safety and IP practice.

What are the practical and clinical implications of this work?

  • This study offers considerations for SLP graduate and postgraduate training in the areas of topical nasal anaesthesia use and laryngeal endoscopy procedures. The results show variability in training for completion of these exams which may contribute to patient safety and outcomes. Promoting an IP approach to care, specifically roles and responsibilities related to use of anaesthesia, may further benefit those we serve.
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
探讨美国语言病理学家在喉内窥镜检查期间接受培训和使用局部鼻腔麻醉的情况。
背景:语言病理学家(slp)使用鼻喉镜(LE)来评估声音和吞咽困难相关疾病。程序方面可能包括使用局部鼻麻醉。目的:探讨美国言语语言听力协会(ASHA)认证的slp在喉内窥镜检查过程中使用麻醉的实践模式。方法和步骤:通过简短的计算机调查收集数据。采用了混合方法。在美国实现了全国代表。结果和结果:有限的LE执照前培训,大部分教育内容嵌入语音课程(64.7%)和通过现场继续教育(CE)进行的学术后培训(58.8% -72.5%)。药理学培训明显缺乏前和后执照组。共有50%的执照后培训是通过跨专业(IP)指导进行的,具有显著相关性(LE置信度和技能r = 0.64, < 0.001,麻醉r = 0.74, < 0.001)。然而,当将知识的信心与程序的技能进行比较时,83%的参与者报告对他们的知识有很高的信心,然而31.25%的参与者报告对执行LE的技能有很高的信心。相反,当将麻醉知识的信心(20.83%)与技能相比时,参与者对麻醉知识的信心较低,但对麻醉技能的信心较高(31.25%)。结论和启示:Bandura 1986年的社会认知学习理论,基于先前经验的替代和自我调节能力的标准化使用,以及在LE执照前和执照后教育中使用IP指导,可能对培训有益。此外,还报告了对未来研究的局限性和建议。本文补充的内容:关于这一主题,我们已经知道喉内窥镜检查是由slp完成的高级能力程序,用于评估和治疗声音和吞咽障碍。能力标准缺乏一致性。同时,局部鼻麻醉可能是一些考试的组成部分,但培训和随后的能力是不一致的。麻醉使用和潜在并发症的教育和培训不是slp研究生培训的必要内容。虽然slp可能是喉内窥镜手术的独立从业者,但尚不清楚他们或其他人是否在IP实践模型中实施麻醉。本研究补充了喉内窥镜在SLP领域中相对较新的知识。目前还没有研究调查与此类手术中使用麻醉剂相关的slp的知识、技能和实践模式。本研究补充了有关美国slp样本在喉软内窥镜检查中使用局部麻醉的实践,他们在局部麻醉方面的培训以及喉软内窥镜检查中IP团队的使用/障碍的文献。与培训和实践的可变性相关的初步见解记录了与药理学、患者安全和知识产权实践相关的slp的潜在学习需求。这项工作的实际和临床意义是什么?本研究为SLP研究生和研究生在局部鼻麻醉使用和喉内窥镜检查方面的培训提供了参考。结果显示,完成这些考试的培训存在差异,这可能有助于患者的安全和结果。推广知识产权护理方法,特别是与麻醉使用有关的角色和责任,可能进一步使我们所服务的对象受益。
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
International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders
International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-REHABILITATION
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
116
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders (IJLCD) is the official journal of the Royal College of Speech & Language Therapists. The Journal welcomes submissions on all aspects of speech, language, communication disorders and speech and language therapy. It provides a forum for the exchange of information and discussion of issues of clinical or theoretical relevance in the above areas.
期刊最新文献
Swallowing, speech and voice impairments in head and neck cancer patients treated at a multidisciplinary integrated patient unit. Staff perceptions and experiences of using Key Word Signing with children with Down syndrome and their peers in the first year of mainstream primary education. Profiling Communication Ability in Dementia: Validation of a new cognitive-communication assessment tool. Assessment and management of late radiation-associated dysphagia after treatment for head and neck cancer: A scoping review and survey of UK speech and language therapists. Do you like my voice? Stakeholder perspectives about the acceptability of synthetic child voices in three South African languages.
×
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