Developing interprofessional collaboration between clinicians, interpreters, and translators in healthcare settings: outcomes from face-to-face training.

Interprofessional collaboration between clinicians, interpreters, and translators is crucial to providing care for consumers with limited English proficiency. Interprofessional training for these professions has been overlooked outside of the medical field. This study investigated whether face-to-face training for speech pathologists, interpreters, and translators improved their knowledge, confidence, practice, and attitudes to engage in interprofessional collaboration. It also examined whether single-profession training for speech pathologists can produce similar training outcomes when delivered to multiple healthcare professions. Thirty interpreters and translators (30 training), 49 speech pathologists (27 training, 22 control), and a mixed group of 24 clinicians from eight professions (16 training, 8 control) completed surveys before, after, and two months after their respective training event. Training outcomes were similar across cohorts. Knowledge and confidence improved and were maintained after two months. Attitudes toward interprofessional collaboration were positive despite perceptions of challenge, and this was largely unchanged after training. Intent to implement optimal practices after training was greater than self-reported practices two months later. While years of professional experience did not affect training outcomes for clinicians, knowledge improvement for interpreters was associated with having less professional experience. Findings highlight the need to reevaluate service planning, policy, and workforce development strategies alongside foundation level training to deliver effective interprofessional education for clinicians, interpreters, and translators in healthcare settings.

The Use of Cervical Auscultation to Predict Oropharyngeal Aspiration in Children: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

In this study, we aimed to determine if the use of cervical auscultation (CA) as an adjunct to the clinical feeding evaluation (CFE + CA) improves the reliability of predicting oropharyngeal aspiration (abbreviated to aspiration) in children. The design of the study is based on open label, randomized controlled trial with concealed allocation. Results from children (<18 years) randomized to either CFE or CFE + CA were compared to videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS), the reference standard data. Aspiration was defined using the Penetration-Aspiration Scale. All assessments were undertaken at a single tertiary pediatric hospital. 155 children referred for a feeding/swallowing assessment were randomized into the CFE n = 83 [38 males; mean age = 34.9 months (SD 34.4)] or CFE + CA n = 72 [43 males; mean age = 39.6 months (SD 39.3)] group. kappa statistic, sensitivity, and specificity values, area under receiver operating curve (aROC). No significant differences between groups were found, although CFE + CA (kappa = 0.41, 95 % CI 0.2-0.62) had higher agreement for aspiration detection by VFSS, compared to the clinical feeding exam alone (kappa = 0.31, 95 % CI 0.10-0.52). Sensitivity was 85 % (95 % CI 62.1-96.8) for CFE + CA and 63.6 % (95 % CI 45.1-79.6) for CFE. aROC was not significantly greater for CFE + CA (0.75, 95 % CI 0.65-0.86) than CFE (0.66, 95 % CI 0.55-0.76) across all age groups. Although using CA as an adjunct to the clinical feeding evaluation improves the sensitivity of predicting aspiration in children, it is not sensitive enough as a diagnostic tool in isolation. Given the serious implications of missing the diagnosis of aspiration, instrumental assessments (e.g., VFSS), remain the preferred standard.

Developing clinical skills in paediatric dysphagia management using human patient simulation (HPS).

PURPOSE: The use of simulated learning environments to develop clinical skills is gaining momentum in speech-language pathology training programs. The aim of the current study was to examine the benefits of adding Human Patient Simulation (HPS) into the university curriculum in the area of paediatric dysphagia. METHOD: University students enrolled in a mandatory dysphagia course (n = 29) completed two, 2-hour HPS scenarios: (a) performing a clinical feeding assessment with a medically complex infant; and (b) conducting a clinical swallow examination (CSE) with a child with a tracheostomy. Scenarios covered technical and non-technical skills in paediatric dysphagia management. Surveys relating to students' perceived knowledge, skills, confidence and levels of anxiety were conducted: (a) pre-lectures; (b) post-lectures, but pre-HPS; and (c) post-HPS. A fourth survey was completed following clinical placements with real clients. RESULT: Results demonstrate significant additive value in knowledge, skills and confidence obtained through HPS. Anxiety about working clinically reduced following HPS. Students rated simulation as very useful in preparing for clinical practice. Post-clinic, students indicated that HPS was an important component in their preparation to work as a clinician. CONCLUSION: This trial supports the benefits of incorporating HPS as part of clinical preparation for paediatric dysphagia management.

Cervical auscultation in the diagnosis of oropharyngeal aspiration in children: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Oropharyngeal aspiration (OPA) can lead to recurrent respiratory illnesses and chronic lung disease in children. Current clinical feeding evaluations performed by speech pathologists have poor reliability in detecting OPA when compared to radiological procedures such as the modified barium swallow (MBS). Improved ability to diagnose OPA accurately via clinical evaluation potentially reduces reliance on expensive, less readily available radiological procedures. Our study investigates the utility of adding cervical auscultation (CA), a technique of listening to swallowing sounds, in improving the diagnostic accuracy of a clinical evaluation for the detection of OPA. METHODS: We plan an open, unblinded, randomised controlled trial at a paediatric tertiary teaching hospital. Two hundred and sixteen children fulfilling the inclusion criteria will be randomised to one of the two clinical assessment techniques for the clinical detection of OPA: (1) clinical feeding evaluation only (CFE) group or (2) clinical feeding evaluation with cervical auscultation (CFE + CA) group. All children will then undergo an MBS to determine radiologically assessed OPA. The primary outcome is the presence or absence of OPA, as determined on MBS using the Penetration-Aspiration Scale. Our main objective is to determine the sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values of 'CFE + CA' versus 'CFE' only compared to MBS-identified OPA. DISCUSSION: Early detection and appropriate management of OPA is important to prevent chronic pulmonary disease and poor growth in children. As the reliability of CFE to detect OPA is low, a technique that can improve the diagnostic accuracy of the CFE will help minimise consequences to the paediatric respiratory system. Cervical auscultation is a technique that has previously been documented as a clinical adjunct to the CFE; however, no published RCTs addressing the reliability of this technique in children exist. Our study will be the first to establish the utility of CA in assessing and diagnosing OPA risk in young children. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (ANZCTR) number ACTRN12613000589785.