Cargando…
Dysphagia Management and Cervical Auscultation: Reliability and Validity Against FEES
This study investigated the reliability and validity (sensitivity and specificity) of cervical auscultation (CA) using both swallow and pre-post swallow-respiratory sounds, as compared with Flexible Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES). With 103 swallow-respiratory sequences from 23 heterogeni...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9873722/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35838785 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00455-022-10468-8 |
_version_ | 1784877659066466304 |
---|---|
author | Jaghbeer, Mariam Sutt, Anna-Liisa Bergström, Liza |
author_facet | Jaghbeer, Mariam Sutt, Anna-Liisa Bergström, Liza |
author_sort | Jaghbeer, Mariam |
collection | PubMed |
description | This study investigated the reliability and validity (sensitivity and specificity) of cervical auscultation (CA) using both swallow and pre-post swallow-respiratory sounds, as compared with Flexible Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES). With 103 swallow-respiratory sequences from 23 heterogenic patients, these swallows sounds were rated by eight CA-trained Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs) to investigate: (1) if the swallow was safe (primary outcome); (2) patient dysphagia status; (3) the influence of liquid viscosity on CA accuracy (secondary outcomes). Primary outcome data showed high CA sensitivity (85.4%), and specificity (80.3%) with all consistencies for the safe measurement, with CA predictive values of [Formula: see text] 90% to accurately detect unsafe swallows. Intra-rater reliability was good (Kappa [Formula: see text] 0.65), inter rater reliability moderate (Kappa [Formula: see text] 0.58). Secondary outcome measures showed high sensitivity (80.1%) to identify if a patient was dysphagic, low specificity (22.9%), and moderate correlation (r(s) [Formula: see text] 0.62) with FEES. A difference across bolus viscosities identified that CA sensitivities (90.1%) and specificities ([Formula: see text] 84.7%) for thin liquids were greater than for thick liquids (71.0–77.4% sensitivities, 74.0–81.3% specificities). Results demonstrate high validity and moderate-good reliability of CA-trained SLPs to determine swallow safety when compared with FEES. Data support the use of CA as an adjunct to the clinical swallow examination. CA should include pre-post respiratory sounds and requires specific training. Clinical implications: The authors advocate for holistic dysphagia management including instrumental assessment and ongoing CSE/review [Formula: see text] CA. Adding CA to the CSE/review does not replace instrumental assessment, nor should CA be used as a stand-alone tool. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00455-022-10468-8. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9873722 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98737222023-01-26 Dysphagia Management and Cervical Auscultation: Reliability and Validity Against FEES Jaghbeer, Mariam Sutt, Anna-Liisa Bergström, Liza Dysphagia Original Article This study investigated the reliability and validity (sensitivity and specificity) of cervical auscultation (CA) using both swallow and pre-post swallow-respiratory sounds, as compared with Flexible Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES). With 103 swallow-respiratory sequences from 23 heterogenic patients, these swallows sounds were rated by eight CA-trained Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs) to investigate: (1) if the swallow was safe (primary outcome); (2) patient dysphagia status; (3) the influence of liquid viscosity on CA accuracy (secondary outcomes). Primary outcome data showed high CA sensitivity (85.4%), and specificity (80.3%) with all consistencies for the safe measurement, with CA predictive values of [Formula: see text] 90% to accurately detect unsafe swallows. Intra-rater reliability was good (Kappa [Formula: see text] 0.65), inter rater reliability moderate (Kappa [Formula: see text] 0.58). Secondary outcome measures showed high sensitivity (80.1%) to identify if a patient was dysphagic, low specificity (22.9%), and moderate correlation (r(s) [Formula: see text] 0.62) with FEES. A difference across bolus viscosities identified that CA sensitivities (90.1%) and specificities ([Formula: see text] 84.7%) for thin liquids were greater than for thick liquids (71.0–77.4% sensitivities, 74.0–81.3% specificities). Results demonstrate high validity and moderate-good reliability of CA-trained SLPs to determine swallow safety when compared with FEES. Data support the use of CA as an adjunct to the clinical swallow examination. CA should include pre-post respiratory sounds and requires specific training. Clinical implications: The authors advocate for holistic dysphagia management including instrumental assessment and ongoing CSE/review [Formula: see text] CA. Adding CA to the CSE/review does not replace instrumental assessment, nor should CA be used as a stand-alone tool. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00455-022-10468-8. Springer US 2022-07-15 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9873722/ /pubmed/35838785 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00455-022-10468-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2022, corrected publication 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Jaghbeer, Mariam Sutt, Anna-Liisa Bergström, Liza Dysphagia Management and Cervical Auscultation: Reliability and Validity Against FEES |
title | Dysphagia Management and Cervical Auscultation: Reliability and Validity Against FEES |
title_full | Dysphagia Management and Cervical Auscultation: Reliability and Validity Against FEES |
title_fullStr | Dysphagia Management and Cervical Auscultation: Reliability and Validity Against FEES |
title_full_unstemmed | Dysphagia Management and Cervical Auscultation: Reliability and Validity Against FEES |
title_short | Dysphagia Management and Cervical Auscultation: Reliability and Validity Against FEES |
title_sort | dysphagia management and cervical auscultation: reliability and validity against fees |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9873722/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35838785 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00455-022-10468-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jaghbeermariam dysphagiamanagementandcervicalauscultationreliabilityandvalidityagainstfees AT suttannaliisa dysphagiamanagementandcervicalauscultationreliabilityandvalidityagainstfees AT bergstromliza dysphagiamanagementandcervicalauscultationreliabilityandvalidityagainstfees |