Fiberoptic endoscopic validation of a clinical screening test of swallowing function in critically ill patients performed within 24 h after extubation.

BACKGROUND: A bedside screening tool of swallowing dysfunction (SD) (BSSD) after extubation would be useful to identify patients who are at risk of SD. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of our BSSD in comparison with fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) in critically ill patients after extubation. METHODS: We conducted a 1-year prospective monocentric study to evaluate the accuracy of our BSSD to diagnose SD following endotracheal intubation in comparison with FEES (gold standard). Patients intubated for longer than 48 h were included. Both tests were assessed within 24 h after extubation. Primary endpoint was the accuracy of the BSSD. Secondary endpoint was to assess risk factors of SD. RESULTS: Seventy-nine patients were included in the study. Thirty-three patients (42%) presented with a SD. The BSSD showed a sensitivity of 88% (95% CI 0.72-0.97) and a specificity of 91% (95% CI 0.79-0.98), a positive predictive value of 88% (95% CI 0.72-0.97) and a negative predictive value of 91% (95% CI 0.79-0.97). The AUC reached 0.83 (95% CI 0.74-0.92). CONCLUSION: Our study describes an accurate clinical screening tool to detect SD after extubation in critically ill patients. Screening-positive cases should be confirmed by instrumental tests, ideally using FEES.

Neck Surgery with Hypnosis: An Evaluation Based Upon Patient's Self Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Surgery with hypnosis avoids the use of general anesthesia (GA). It also shortens hospitalization and promotes outpatient surgery. The objective of this study has been to assess the satisfaction of operated patients. No previous study has focused on patient satisfaction in a prospective design. METHODS: In this prospective, non-randomized, observational study, all patients operated with hypnosis between 2009 and 2017 in the Ear, Nose, and Throat department of a tertiary care hospital were selected. All patients were asked to fill a questionnaire based on a previously validated questionnaire incremented with complementary questions. Questionnaires were completed immediately after surgery for 31 patients and after 6 months for 20 patients. Global Satisfaction Index (GSI) was self-assessed on a scale ranging from 1 to 10. Patients were asked; whether they felt comfortable during the operation, whether hypnosis helped them, whether the experience matched their expectations, whether they would revisit or recommend it to someone else and whether they considered to have been sufficiently informed before the procedure. The data was analyzed using a linear regression model with P < .05 considered as statistically significant. RESULTS: During the inclusion period, no patient required conversion to GA. A total of 48 questionnaires were evaluated. The median of the GSI was 8/10. GSI significantly correlated with patient comfort (P < 0.0001) and quality of preoperative information (P = .002). The percentage of patients who found hypnosis helpful correlated with the duration of surgery (P = .04). The probability for a patient to consider hypnosis as an experience matching their expectation increased with surgical team experience OR 0.55 (0.3-0.9). CONCLUSION: This study reveals that patients' global satisfaction after hypnosis is high. This is significantly related to the quality of preoperative information and to the experience of the surgical team. It also suggests that patients are more likely to benefit from hypnosis if the surgery is longer.