Dysphagia最新文献

Background: COVID-19 can lead to impairment of neural networks involved in swallowing, since the act of swallowing is coordinated and performed by a diffuse brain network involving peripheral nerves and muscles. Dysphagia has been identified as a risk and predictive factor for the severest form of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Objectives: To investigate the association between swallowing disorders and COVID-19 in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

Methods: We collected demographic data, medical information specific to dysphagia and data on medical treatments of patients with COVID-19.

Results: A total of 43 hospitalized COVID-19 patients were enrolled in the study. Twenty (46%) were evaluated positive for dysphagia and 23 (54%) were evaluated negative. Neurocognitive disorders and diabetes were mostly associated with patients who resulted positive for dysphagia. Respiratory impairment caused by COVID-19 seems to be a cause of dysphagia, since all patients who needed oxygen-therapy developed symptoms of dysphagia, unlike patients who did not. In the dysphagic group, alteration of the swallowing trigger resulted in the severest form of dysphagia. An association was found between the severest form of COVID-19 and dysphagia. This group consisted predominantly of males with longer hospitalization.

Conclusions: Identification of COVID-19 patients at risk for dysphagia is crucial for better patient management.

Although the psychosocial sequelae of living with dysphagia secondary to Parkinson disease (PD) are described in the literature as challenging, there has been little focus on using this information to influence the design of dysphagia treatment. A more nuanced understanding of the psychosocial experiences of this population may assist clinicians in providing a patient-centered approach to care. Our study was designed to gather insight into the common psychosocial experiences associated with dysphagia in the context of PD. A semi-structured interview consisting of open- and closed items was conducted with 25 individuals from regions across the country with self-reported oropharyngeal dysphagia secondary to PD. Questions were developed using comprehensive stress and coping frameworks that emphasized psychosocial predictors of specific affective reactions (e.g., grief, anxiety, depression), including self-evaluation (e.g., self-identity), coping strategies, social support, personal expectations (including perceived control over symptoms and prognosis), positive experiences, and perceptions of personal growth. Interview responses were subjected to a qualitative analysis and revealed three dominant themes: (1) Recalibration of a PD Diagnosis, (2) Vigilant Caution to Swallowing, and (3) Grieving the Loss of the Communal Meal. Using these data interpretations, we discuss three concepts for speech-language pathologists working with individuals with dysphagia and PD to consider during clinical interactions; these are reframing swallowing vigilance to engagement with mindful eating, using biofeedback to align patient perceptions and swallow physiology, and understanding the consequences of loss (of their former swallowing ability) through grief and growth reactions.

Dysphagia is known to present a social and psychological burden with negative effects on quality of life. However, the psychosocial effect of an individual's dysphagia on those that care for them is less known. The purpose of this study was to develop a clinically efficient, statistically robust companion-reported outcomes measure to the Dysphagia Handicap Index (DHI) to better understand the impact of a patient's dysphagia on their companions as related to physical, emotional and functional domains of health-related quality of life. Seventy-seven initial statements describing companion perceptions of dysphagia were divided into physical, emotional and functional subscales. The statements were administered to 75 consecutive companions of individuals with dysphagia. Respondents replied never, almost never, sometimes, almost always and always to each statement and rated their companion's dysphagia severity on a 7-point equal appearing interval scale. Cronbach's α was performed to assess the internal consistency validation of the statements. The final questionnaire was reduced to 25 items and administered to 317 companions of individuals with dysphagia and 31 controls. Test-retest was performed on 29 companions of individuals with dysphagia. Cronbach's α was strong for the initial and final versions at r = 0.96 and r = 0.97 respectively. Significant differences occurred between companion responses of subjects with dysphagia and the control group. Test-retest reliability was strong (all ICC > 0.85). We present a statistically robust companion-reported outcomes measure to assess the handicapping effects of dysphagia on companions to further our understanding of the global effect of dysphagia and to guide treatment for successful swallowing outcomes.

Dysphagia is a symptom that appears with high prevalence in persons diagnosed with dementia, intellectual disability, or severe mental illness. Risk of aspiration pneumonia or even death is very high in these populations. However, screening for dysphagia risk in these patients is complicated by the fact that most of them suffer from cognitive impairments and behavioral manifestations that hinder the assessment process using the existing screening tests. The aim of this study was to validate the Oropharyngeal Dysphagia Screening Test for Patients and Professionals, in patients with cognitive impairment (dementia/intellectual disability) or with severe mental illness (schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, bipolar disorder, or major depressive disorder). For this purpose, 148 institutionalized patients were evaluated by professionals responsible for their food intake. The Oropharyngeal Dysphagia Screening Test for Patients and Professionals was used to assess its validity in screening for oropharyngeal dysphagia in patients with cognitive impairments and in patients with severe mental illness. Also, the Eating Assessment Tool-10 and the Swallowing Disturbance Questionnaire were used for convergent reliability procedures. Four comparison groups were established: patients with cognitive impairment with and without oropharyngeal dysphagia, and patients with severe mental illness with and without oropharyngeal dysphagia. Results from the Oropharyngeal Dysphagia Screening Test for Patients and Professionals adequately distinguished between groups with and without dysphagia, in addition to presenting adequate levels of convergent validity and reliability. These results were obtained from other-reports (professionals responsible for patients' food intake), using a simple, quickly applied test that does not require the use of food in patients with an altered cognitive state or with severe mental illness. With this study we expand the validity of the Oropharyngeal Dysphagia Screening Test for Patients and Professionals in populations with severe cognitive deficits and mental illness in which there is a great deficiency of oropharyngeal dysphagia screening instruments.

Background: The radiation dose to dysphagia and aspiration-related structures (DARS) for patients undergoing transoral robotic surgery (TORS) and post-operative radiation therapy (PORT) for primary oropharyngeal carcinoma is unknown.

Methods: This prospective study measured swallowing using the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory at baseline and then 12-months after PORT. Dosimetric parameters were collected.

Results: 19 patients were recruited between 2017 and 2019. Worse swallow function at 12-months after PORT was associated with dose-parameters to the oesophageal inlet muscle, superior pharyngeal constrictor muscle and cervical oesophagus. Mean dose, V50Gy, and V60Gy to the base of tongue and pharyngeal constrictors was significantly lower in those receiving PORT to the neck alone.

Conclusion: Dose to DARS was lower in patients who received PORT to the neck alone. In patients treated with TORS and PORT, poorer swallowing outcomes at 12 months post-treatment were associated with increased dose to oesophageal inlet muscle, superior constrictor muscle, and cervical oesophagus.

Background: Pediatric feeding disorder (PFD) is increasingly common and is often treated by speech language pathologists (SLPs) and occupational therapists (OTs) in the community setting. However, the preparedness of these disciplines to effectively address PFD is relatively unknown.

Methods: A national (US), online survey was disseminated to providers who assess and treat PFD. For the present analysis, the responses of SLPs (N = 418) and OTs (N = 195) related to their clinical background, educational background, post-graduate training, and self-rated clinical effectiveness were statistically analyzed and compared across the two disciplines.

Results: Both SLPs and OTs report feeling underprepared to work with PFD clients immediately following their academic training, but time spent in post-graduate training and years of clinical practice both significantly (p < 0.0001) increased feelings of effectiveness in assessing and treating PFD. Most SLPs and OTs pursued self-directed learning activities to increase competence, with the most common activities being article review, podcasts, and peer case review, although SLPs were significantly more likely to use podcasts (p < 0.0001) and peer review (p = 0.0004) than OTs. The most common barriers for providers were financial, time, travel, and institutional support barriers.

Conclusions: While PFD is a key practice area of both SLPs and OTs, both provider groups feel unprepared and under-supported in providing competent care to these patients upon graduation. Future research and policy should support advancements in training for current SLPs and OTs related to PFD and address current barriers to a specialized educational pathway.

Dysphagia is the most common serious complication after stroke, with an incidence of about 37-78%, which seriously affects the independence of patients in daily life and clinical recovery. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), as a non-invasive neuromodulation technique, is an emerging option for post-stroke dysphagia. Theta burst stimulation (TBS) is a new mode of transcranial magnetic stimulation that simulates the frequency of pulses released in the hippocampus.Intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) has been shown to increase cortical excitability and improve swallowing function in patients. Our study sought to summarize existing clinical randomized controlled trials to provide evidence-based medical evidence for the clinical use of iTBS. A computer search was conducted on 4 Chinese (Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, VIP Information Resource System, CNKI, and Wanfang Medical Science) and 4 English (including Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science) databases to retrieve all randomized controlled trials in Chinese and English that explored the effects of Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation for post-stroke dysphagia. The retrieval years are from database construction to 23 November 2023. The primary outcome measure was a change in Penetration/Aspiration Scale (PAS), Standardized Swallowing Assessment (SSA) and Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS), Secondary outcomes included Fiberoptic Endoscopic Dysphagia Severity Scale (FEDSS), water-swallowing test (WST) etc. A meta-analysis by Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) was performed with RevMan 5.3. we appraise risk of bias(RoB) of each study with the Cochrane RoB tool. Detailed instructions for using the Cochrane RoB tool are provided in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (The Cochrane Handbook). Nine studies were obtained from eight databases after screening by inclusion and exclusion criteria, 567 patients from 9 studies were included in the meta-analysis, and one study was included in the qualitative analysis due to different control groups. Two of the nine studies had an unclear risk of bias, and four studies were at low risk. The results showed that iTBS significantly improved SSA, PAS, FOIS, and PAS scores in stroke patients compared to the control group(P < 0.05), and promoted swallowing function recovery. Our systematic review provides the first evidence of the efficacy of iTBS in improving dysphagia in stroke patients. However, the number of available studies limits the persuasiveness of the evidence and further validation by additional randomized controlled trials is needed.

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in pulmonary rehabilitation programs (PRPs) are not routinely screened for dysphagia. An Australian regional health service audit revealed that patients with COPD are frequently referred to speech pathology during acute admissions, rather than proactively to mitigate the risk of dysphagia-related consequences. Referral patterns to speech pathology using a novel transdisciplinary approach for identifying at risk for dysphagia patients in a PRP were explored. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of a transdisciplinary dysphagia screening questionnaire on speech pathology referrals within a cohort of patients with COPD enrolled in a PRP. This quasi-experimental study introduced a dysphagia screening questionnaire in a PRP using a transdisciplinary approach. A retrospective audit of PRP patients (n = 563) between 01/01/2014 and 31/12/2018 was conducted to identify the frequency of referrals to speech pathology for dysphagia. Data was compared to a cohort of patients (n = 50) enrolled in the PRP (from 01/02/21 to 30/11/21) after introduction of the questionnaire using Fisher's exact test. Less than 1% (n = 4/563) of PRP patients were referred to speech pathology prior to implementation of the questionnaire. Following the implementation, referrals to speech pathology significantly increased to 16% (8/50) (X² = 7.72, P < 0.05; odds ratio = 7.89 95% CI [1.94, 32.1]). Introducing a dysphagia screening questionnaire increased referrals to speech pathology from a PRP. This study demonstrated the potential for a transdisciplinary approach in early screening for patients at risk of dysphagia for patients with COPD. Further research is encouraged to explore patient motivation towards speech pathology input with COPD-related dysphagia and clinicians' perceived self-efficacy in using the questionnaire.

Clinical implementation of evidence-based practice (EBP) tools is a healthcare priority. The Dynamic Grade of Swallowing Toxicity (DIGEST) is an EBP tool developed in 2016 for videofluoroscopy in head and neck (H&N) oncology with clinical implementation as a goal. We sought to examine: (1) feasibility of clinical implementation of DIGEST in a national comprehensive cancer center, and (2) fidelity of DIGEST adoption in real-world practice. A retrospective implementation evaluation was conducted in accordance with the STARI framework. Electronic health record (EHR) databases were queried for all consecutive modified barium swallow (MBS) studies conducted at MD Anderson Cancer Center from 2016 to 2021. Implementation outcomes included: feasibility as measured by DIGEST reporting in EHR (as a marker of clinical use) and fidelity as measured by accuracy of DIGEST reporting relative to the decision-tree logic (penetration-aspiration scale [PAS], residue, and Safety [S] and Efficiency [E] grades). Contextual factors examined included year, setting, cancer type, MBS indication, and provider. 13,055 MBS were conducted by 29 providers in 7,842 unique patients across the lifespan in diverse oncology populations (69% M; age 1-96 years; 58% H&N cancer; 10% inpatient, 90% outpatient). DIGEST was reported in 12,137/13,088 exams over the 6-year implementation period representing 93% (95% CI: 93-94%) adoption in all exams and 99% (95% CI: 98-99%) of exams excluding the total laryngectomy population (n = 730). DIGEST reporting varied modestly by year, cancer type, and setting/provider (> 91% in all subgroups, p < 0.001). Accuracy of DIGEST reporting was high for overall DIGEST (incorrect SE profile 1.6%, 200/12,137), DIGEST-safety (incorrect PAS 0.4% 51/12,137) and DIGEST-efficiency (incorrect residue 1.2%, 148/12,137). Clinical implementation of DIGEST was feasible with high fidelity in a busy oncology practice across a large number of providers. Adoption of the tool across the lifespan in diverse cancer diagnoses may motivate validation beyond H&N oncology.

The purpose of this study was to cross-culturally validate the Swedish version of the Gugging Swallowing Screen (GUSS-S) for use in the acute phase of stroke. Further, to evaluate the inter-rater reliability between different healthcare professionals. GUSS was translated into Swedish using a forward-backward method followed by expert rating to obtain content validity. For criterion validity, the GUSS-S score was compared with Flexible Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) assessed with the Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS) in acute stroke patients (≤ 96 h after stroke onset). Convergent validity was calculated by comparison with the Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) as per the comprehensive FEES assessment, the Standardized Swallowing Assessment (SSA), and the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). To evaluate inter-rater reliability, a nurse and a speech-language pathologist (SLP) independently assessed 30 patients. In total, 80 patients (32 women, median age 77 years (range 29-93) were included, mean 1.7 ± 0.9 days after admission. With a cut-off value of 14 points, the GUSS-S identified aspiration with a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 73% (area under the curve: 0.87, 95% CI 0.78-0.95). Spearman rank correlation showed very strong correlation between the GUSS-S and PAS (r_s=-0.718, P = < 0.001) and FOIS (r_s=0.720, P = 0.001) and strong correlation between the GUSS-S and SSA (r_s=0.545, P = < 0.001) and NIHSS (r_s=-0.447, P = 0.001). The inter-rater agreement for GUSS-S was substantial (_Kw=0.67, P = < 0.001). The results indicate that the GUSS-S is a valid and reliable tool for the assessment of dysphagia in acute stroke patients by different healthcare professionals.