Pharyngeal Residue Scoring in Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing: Reliability Comparison and Applicability Among Different Scales.

Several scales to assess pharyngeal residue in Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) are currently available. The study aimed to compare the reliability and the applicability in real clinical practice among four rating scales: the Pooling Score (P-SCORE), the Boston Residue and Clearance Scale (BRACS), the Yale Pharyngeal Residue Severity Rating Scale (YPRSRS), and the Residue Ordinal Rating Scale (RORS). Twenty-five FEES videos were evaluated four times, once for each scale, by four speech and language pathologists. To test intra-rater reliability, the same raters re-assessed the videos two weeks apart. To test the applicability, raters recorded the time required to complete each assessment and the perceived difficulty/ease on a visual-analog scale (VAS). The intra-rater and the inter-rater reliability were calculated with Cohen's weighted Kappa and the Fleiss weighted Kappa, respectively. Time and perceived difficulty/ease scores were compared. The intra-rater reliability analysis showed almost perfect agreement for YPRSRS (k = 0.91) and RORS (k = 0.83) and substantial agreement for P-SCORE (k = 0.76) and BRACS (k = 0.74). Pairwise comparison showed no significant differences among the scales. The inter-rater reliability for the YPRSRS (k = 0.78) was significantly higher than P-SCORE (k = 0.52, p < 0.001), BRACS (k = 0.56, p < 0.001), and RORS (k = 0.65, p = 0.005). The BRACS required the longest time (p < 0.001) and was perceived as the most difficult scale (p < 0.001). The RORS was perceived as the easiest scale (p < 0.05). In conclusion, the YPRSRS showed the highest reliability, while raters perceived the RORS as the easiest to score. These results will allow clinicians to consciously choose which scale to use in clinical practice.

Pharyngeal Residues Scoring through the Yale Pharyngeal Residue Severity Rating Scale (YPRSRS): Efficacy of Training.

The assessment of pharyngeal residues during fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) is based on visual-perceptual scales that involve clinical subjectivity. Training might be helpful to increase agreement among clinicians. This paper aims to assess the efficacy of training for the assessment of pharyngeal residue in FEES frames and videos through the Yale Pharyngeal Residue Severity Rating Scale (YPRSRS). Twenty-nine clinicians (Phoniatricians, Otorhinolaryngologists, Speech and Language Pathologists) and 47 students in Speech and Language Pathology participated in this study. Fourteen clinicians were randomly allocated to the training group, whilst the remaining 15 served as a control group; all the students participated in the training. Participants scored 30 pairs of videos and frames using the YPRSRS twice, before and after the training for the training groups and at least two weeks apart for the control group. Construct validity, defined as the agreement between each rater and the experts' scores, and inter-rater reliability were compared among the groups and between the first and the second assessments to verify the efficacy of the training. Construct validity significantly improved at the second assessment in the training group for the pyriform sinuses videos (baseline 0.71 ± 0.04, post-training 0.82 ± 0.05, p = .049) and in the students' group for the valleculae (baseline 0.64 ± 0.02, post-training 0.84 ± 0.02, p < .001) and pyriform sinuses videos (baseline 0.55 ± 0.03, post-training 0.77 ± 0.02, p < .05). No significant differences were found in the inter-rater reliability in any group. In conclusion, the training seems to improve participants' agreement with experts in scoring the YPRSRS in FEES videos.

Validity, reliability and reproducibility of the VLS parameters form for the collection of videolaryngostroboscopic basic findings.

OBJECTIVE: The videolaryngostroboscopy parameters form (VLSP form) is a diagnostic tool for the collection of videolaryngostroboscopic basic findings through the evaluation of 12 parameters. The aim of the present study is to preliminarily investigate intra- and inter-rater reliability, validity and responsiveness of the VLSP form. METHODS: A study on a total amount of 160 forms for the evaluation of VLS basic findings was carried out. 80 forms were scored through the VLSP form and 80 with the Voice Vibratory Assessment with Laryngeal Imaging (VALI) form Stroboscopy (S) by four expert phoniatricians, that blindly scored the VLS recordings of 5 subjects without voice disorders and 5 patients with organic voice disorder before and after successful phonosurgery. Intra-rater and inter-rater analysis have been performed for both forms. The scores obtained through VLSP form and VALI form S have been compared to analyse concurrent validity, while VLSP scores before and after phonosurgery have been compared to analyse responsiveness. Finally, each rater annotated the "difficulty" in rating every parameter and its "importance" for the diagnosis. RESULTS: The VLSP form showed good inter- and intra-rater reliability. It showed a good accuracy for the documentation of changes of laryngeal anatomy and function after phonosurgery, similarly to the VALI form S. The 12 parameters of the VLSP form were judged "Slightly Important" in 28.3% of the samples, "Very Important" in 64.8% of the samples, "Not Difficult" in 73.1% of the samples. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study suggest that the VLSP form is comparable to the VALI form S for the evaluation of videolaryngostroboscopic parameters and is a valid, reliable and reproducible diagnostic tool. It can help voice clinicians in the evaluation of VLS examinations and it allows for a punctual assessment of modifications in laryngeal anatomy and function in pathological conditions and after phonosurgery.

Early predictors of dysphagia in ischaemic stroke patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Post-stroke dysphagia affects outcome. In acute stroke patients, the aim was to evaluate clinical, cognitive and neuroimaging features associated with dysphagia and develop a predictive score for dysphagia. METHODS: Ischaemic stroke patients underwent clinical, cognitive and pre-morbid function evaluations. Dysphagia was retrospectively scored on admission and discharge with the Functional Oral Intake Scale. RESULTS: In all, 228 patients (mean age 75.8 years; 52% males) were included. On admission, 126 (55%) were dysphagic (Functional Oral Intake Scale ≤6). Age (odds ratio [OR] 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-1.05), pre-event modified Rankin scale (mRS) score (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.09-1.84), National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score (OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.49-2.14), frontal operculum lesion (OR 8.53, 95% CI 3.82-19.06) and Oxfordshire total anterior circulation infarct (TACI) (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.05-2.04) were independently associated with dysphagia at admission. Education (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.98) had a protective role. At discharge, 82 patients (36%) were dysphagic. Pre-event mRS (OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.04-1.56), admission NIHSS (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.56-2.26), frontal operculum involvement (OR 15.53, 95% CI 7.44-32.43) and Oxfordshire classification TACI (OR 3.82, 95% CI 1.95-7.50) were independently associated with dysphagia at discharge. Education (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83-0.96) and thrombolysis (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.23-0.95) had a protective role. The 6-point "NOTTEM" (NIHSS, opercular lesion, TACI, thrombolysis, education, mRS) score predicted dysphagia at discharge with good accuracy. Cognitive scores had no role in dysphagia risk. CONCLUSIONS: Dysphagia predictors were defined and a score was developed to evaluate dysphagia risk during stroke unit stay. In this setting, cognitive impairment is not a predictor of dysphagia. Early dysphagia assessment may help in planning future rehabilitative and nutrition strategies.

Position Statement of the Union of European Phoniatricians (UEP): Fees and Phoniatricians' Role in Multidisciplinary and Multiprofessional Dysphagia Management Team.

The need for multidisciplinary and multiprofessional management of dysphagia is constantly increasing and creating a major challenge for healthcare professionals and society, especially in terms of professional expertise and human resources. The distribution of tasks among the dysphagia team members, which includes phoniatricians, otolaryngologists, and speech-language therapists, is flexible and overlapping. For assessing dysphagia, the (fibreoptic) flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES), with or without videofluoroscopy, is a pivotal diagnostic tool. This position paper aims to illustrate the phoniatrician's role in performing a FEES, which is an indispensable component of the diagnostic workup of patients suffering from oropharyngeal dysphagia. It is based on the current collaborative expert view of the Swallowing Committee of the Union of European Phoniatricians and a literature review. A FEES is one of the core competences of phoniatricians due to their endoscopic expertise and experience in the field of dysphagia and diseases of the upper aerodigestive tract. Therefore, the phoniatrician is an important member of the dysphagia team, for the medical diagnostics of the aerodigestive tract and dysphagia as well as for FEES. Phoniatric competence is especially important for head and neck cancer patients, infants, and complex cases.

Swallowing Characteristics in Patients with Multiple System Atrophy Analyzed Using FEES Examination.

Patients with multiple system atrophy (MSA) frequently experience dysphagia but only few studies analyzed its characteristics. The aim of this study was to describe the swallowing characteristics in these patients using fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES). In addition, the swallowing abilities in patients with predominantly cerebellar MSA (MSA-C) and predominantly parkinsonian MSA (MSA-P) were compared. Twenty-five patients with MSA (16 MSA-P and 9 MSA-C) were enrolled. Clinical data including age, sex, functional oral intake scale (FOIS) score, body mass index (BMI) and the results of the global disability-unified MSA rating scale (GD-UMSARS) were collected. Three different textures of food (liquid, semisolid, solid) were provided during FEES examination. The characteristics of dysphagia (safety, efficiency, phenotype) and laryngeal movement alterations were analyzed. Delayed pharyngeal phase (92%) and posterior oral incontinence (52%) were the phenotypes more frequently seen. Penetration was more frequent with Liquid (68%), while aspiration occurred only with Liquid (20%). Residues of ingested food were demonstrated both in the pyriform sinus and in the vallecula with all the consistencies. Vocal fold motion impairment was the laryngeal movement alteration most frequently encountered (56%). No significant differences between patients with MSA-P and MSA-C in the dysphagia characteristics and laryngeal movement alterations were found. Patients with MSA frequently experience swallowing impairment and altered laryngeal mobility. Dysphagia characteristics and laryngeal movements alterations seems to be similar in MSA-C and MSA-P.

Intra and interobserver agreement of the Dynamic Imaging Grade of Swallowing Toxicity Scale (DIGEST) in fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES): the importance of observer-tailored training.

PURPOSE: The Dynamic Imaging Grade of Swallowing Toxicity (DIGEST) is a scale to quantify the severity of pharyngeal dysphagia in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients. This study (1) described the training process of the observers for DIGEST in fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES), (2) determined observer agreement on the DIGEST in FEES, (3) explored the effect of bolus consistency on observer agreement, and 4) explored criterion validity of the DIGEST in FEES. METHODS: Twenty-seven dysphagic HNC patients were enrolled. Two observers completed a training program for DIGEST in FEES. Observer agreement on the Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS), percentage of pharyngeal residue (PPR), and DIGEST grades was determined using linearly weighted Cohen's kappa coefficient (κ). RESULTS: Due to insufficient observer agreement after the first measurement attempt, additional training was organized using an elaborated manual with descriptions of the visuoperceptual variables, thereby improving observer agreement. Intraobserver agreement was almost perfect on the PAS (κ = 0.86-0.88) and PPR (κ = 0.84-0.86). Interobserver agreement was substantial on the PAS (κ = 0.78), almost perfect on the PPR (κ = 0.82), substantial on the safety grade (κ = 0.64), almost perfect on the efficiency grade (κ = 0.85), and substantial on the summary grade (κ = 0.71). Bolus consistency had an effect on observer agreement. A significant correlation was found between DIGEST efficiency grade and EAT-10. CONCLUSION: The DIGEST showed to be a reproducible measurement for FEES in terms of observer agreement. However, agreement between novice observers on the DIGEST was only reached after specific observer-tailored training. Observer agreement should be analyzed by taking bolus consistency into account during training, as this might affect the interpretation of the outcome. A manual with well-defined descriptions can optimize the reproducibility of DIGEST measurements.

Sirolimus treatment for paediatric head and neck lymphatic malformations: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: This PRISMA-compliant systematic review aimed to assess risks and benefits of sirolimus treatment for paediatric lymphatic malformations by focusing not only on treatment efficacy but also on possible treatment-related adverse events, and treatment combinations with other techniques. METHODS: Search criteria were applied to MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases and included all studies published up to March 2022 reporting paediatric lymphatic malformations treated with sirolimus. We selected all original studies that included treatment outcomes. After the removal of duplicates, selection of abstracts and full-text articles, and quality assessment, we reviewed eligible articles for patient demographics, lymphatic malformation type, size or stage, site, clinical response rates, sirolimus administration route and dose, related adverse events, follow-up time, and concurrent treatments. RESULTS: Among 153 unique citations, 19 studies were considered eligible, with reported treatment data for 97 paediatric patients. Most studies (n = 9) were case reports. Clinical response was described for 89 patients, in whom 94 mild-to-moderate adverse events were reported. The most frequently administered treatment regimen was oral sirolimus 0.8 mg/m2 twice a day, with the aim of achieving a blood concentration of 10-15 ng/mL. CONCLUSION: Despite promising results for sirolimus treatment in lymphatic malformation, the efficacy and safety profile of remains unclear due to the lack of high-quality studies. Systematic reporting of known side effects, especially in younger children, should assist clinicians in minimising treatment-associated risks. At the same time, we advocate for prospective multicentre studies with minimum reporting standards to facilitate improved candidate selection.

Consensus for voice quality assessment in clinical practice: guidelines of the European Laryngological Society and Union of the European Phoniatricians.

INTRODUCTION: To update the European guidelines for the assessment of voice quality (VQ) in clinical practice. METHODS: Nineteen laryngologists-phoniatricians of the European Laryngological Society (ELS) and the Union of the European Phoniatricians (UEP) participated to a modified Delphi process to propose statements about subjective and objective VQ assessments. Two anonymized voting rounds determined a consensus statement to be acceptable when 80% of experts agreed with a rating of at least 3/4. The statements with ≥ 3/4 score by 60-80% of experts were improved and resubmitted to voting until they were validated or rejected. RESULTS: Of the 90 initial statements, 51 were validated after two voting rounds. A multidimensional set of minimal VQ evaluations was proposed and included: baseline VQ anamnesis (e.g., allergy, medical and surgical history, medication, addiction, singing practice, job, and posture), videolaryngostroboscopy (mucosal wave symmetry, amplitude, morphology, and movements), patient-reported VQ assessment (30- or 10-voice handicap index), perception (Grade, Roughness, Breathiness, Asthenia, and Strain), aerodynamics (maximum phonation time), acoustics (Mean F0, Jitter, Shimmer, and noise-to-harmonic ratio), and clinical instruments associated with voice comorbidities (reflux symptom score, reflux sign assessment, eating-assessment tool-10, and dysphagia handicap index). For perception, aerodynamics and acoustics, experts provided guidelines for the methods of measurement. Some additional VQ evaluations are proposed for voice professionals or patients with some laryngeal diseases. CONCLUSION: The ELS-UEP consensus for VQ assessment provides clinical statements for the baseline and pre- to post-treatment evaluations of VQ and to improve collaborative research by adopting common and validated VQ evaluation approach.

Daily speaking time and voice intensity before and after hearing aids rehabilitation in adult patients with hearing loss.

Introduction Hearing loss (HL) strongly impacts communication abilities and impairs social interactions. Moreover, it modifies the vocal parameters of affected patients. The effects of hearing rehabilitation through hearing aids (HA) on the vocal production of patients suffering from HL have not been thoroughly analyzed in literature. The aim of this study is to use the Ambulatory Phonation Monitor (APM), a portable vocal dosimeter, to evaluate the variations in the vocal production of a group of patients suffering from moderate-to-severe HL treated with HA, and the relationship between such modifications and quality of life (QoL). Materials and Methods Twenty-six patients suffering from a variable degree of HL and treated with HA have been enrolled. Each of them underwent an evaluation before and 4 months after rehabilitation with HA. The analysis of daily voice production was carried out with the APM, while subjective QoL data were collected through the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities questionnaire (SSQ) and the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA). The differences in phonatory measurements and subjective evaluations before and after HA rehabilitation were assessed using Wilcoxon signed rank test. The Spearman correlation test was used to analyze the correlation between phonatory measurements, auditory measurements and SSQ scores. Results Significant differences in the APM parameters before and after HA rehabilitation were found. After 4 months of HA use, we recorded a significant increase in phonation time and percentage of phonation time, and a significant decrease in average amplitude in dB SPL. We also found a significant increase in the SSQ scores after HA rehabilitation. Finally, we were able to detect low but significant correlations between phonatory measurements and SSQ results. Conclusions The APM proved to be a useful instrument in the evaluation of the benefits of HA and its measurements can be used as indicators of the participation in communication and social life of patients with HL, which are strongly related to QoL.

Predictors of malnutrition risk in neurodegenerative diseases: The role of swallowing function.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Oropharyngeal dysphagia is generally recognized to increase the risk of malnutrition; however, its role in patients with neurodegenerative disease has yet to be determined. This cross-sectional study aimed to investigate the impact of swallowing function on malnutrition risk in patients with neurodegenerative diseases. METHODS: Patients with oral nutrition and diagnosis of Huntington disease (HD), Parkinson disease (PD), or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) were recruited. Demographic and clinical data were collected. The swallowing assessment included a fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing, an oral phase assessment, and a meal observation scored with the Mealtime Assessment Scale (MAS). Malnutrition risk was assessed with the Mini Nutritional Assessment. RESULTS: Overall, 148 patients were recruited (54 HD, 33 PD, and 61 ALS). One hundred (67.6%) patients were considered at risk of malnutrition. In the multivariate analysis, age ≥ 65 years (odds ratio [OR] = 3.16, p = 0.014), disease severity (moderate vs mild OR = 3.89, severe vs mild OR = 9.71, p = 0.003), number of masticatory cycles (OR = 1.03, p = 0.044), and MAS safety (OR = 1.44, p = 0.016) were significantly associated with malnutrition risk. CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged oral phase and signs of impaired swallowing safety during meals, together with older age and disease severity, are independent predictors of malnutrition risk in neurodegenerative diseases. This study broadens the focus on dysphagia, stressing the importance of early detection not only of pharyngeal signs, but also of oral phase impairment and meal difficulties through a multidimensional swallowing assessment.

Validation of the Italian Version of the Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS-It) Against Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing and Nutritional Status.

The Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS) is a reliable and valid tool to assess functional oral intake of food and liquids in patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD). Its validity was established for stroke patients against Videofluoroscopic Swallowing Study in English and Chinese and against Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) in German. FOIS was cross-culturally validated into Italian (FOIS-It), but construct validity against instrumental assessment and nutritional status was not investigated. The study aims at contributing to the validation of the FOIS-It, by performing convergent and known-group validity against FEES and nutritional status in patients with OD of different etiologies. Overall, 220 adult patients with OD of etiological heterogeneity were recruited. FOIS-It score and Body Mass Index (BMI) were collected. FEES was performed to assess swallowing safety and efficiency based on the Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS) and the Yale Pharyngeal Residue Severity Rating Scale (YPRSRS). Moderate to weak associations with PAS (ρ = - .37, p < .01), YPRSRS in the pyriform sinuses (ρ = - .20, p < .01), and BMI (ρ = .24, p < .01) were detected with Spearman's correlation. FOIS-It distribution was compared with the Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests. Significantly lower FOIS-It scores were detected among patients with penetration/aspiration (PAS > 2) and penetration (PAS > 2 ≤ 5) for all consistencies (p < .01), aspiration (PAS > 5) of liquids and semisolids (p < .001), residue in the pyriform sinuses (YPRSRS > 3) with semisolids (p < .001) and solids (p = .02), and malnutrition (BMI ≤ 18.5; p = .019). FOIS-It appears as a valid tool to assess functional oral intake against FEES' measures of swallowing safety and efficiency and nutritional status in patients with OD of etiological heterogeneity.

Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Italian Version of the Dysphagia Handicap Index (I-DHI).

The Dysphagia Handicap Index (DHI) is a valid Health-related Quality of Life (HRQOL) questionnaire for patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) of heterogeneous etiologies. The study aimed at crossculturally translating and adapting the DHI into Italian (I-DHI) and analyzing I-DHI reliability, validity, and interpretability. The I-DHI was developed according to Beaton et al. 5-stage process and completed by 75 adult OD patients and 166 healthy adults. Twenty-six patients filled out the I-DHI twice, 2 weeks apart, for test-retest reliability purposes. Sixty-two patients completed the Italian-Swallowing Quality of Life Questionnaire (I-SWAL-QoL) for criterion validity analysis. Construct validity was tested comparing I-DHI scores among patients with different instrumentally assessed and self-rated OD severity, comparing patients and healthy participants and testing Spearman's correlations among I-DHI subscales. I-DHI interpretability was assessed and normative data were generated. Participants autonomously completed the I-DHI in maximum 10 min. Reliability proved satisfactory for all I-DHI subscales (internal consistency: α > .76; test-retest reliability: intraclass correlation coefficient > .96, k = .81). Mild to moderate correlations (- .26 ≤ ρ ≤ - .72) were found between I-DHI and I-SWAL-QoL subscales. Construct validity proved satisfactory as (i) moderate to strong correlations (.51 ≤ ρ ≤ .90) were found among I-DHI subscales; (ii) patients with more severe instrumentally or self-assessed OD reported higher I-DHI scores (p < .05); and (iii) OD patients scored higher at I-DHI compared to healthy participants (p < .05). Interpretability analyses revealed a floor effect for the Emotional subscale only and higher I-DHI scores (p < .05) for healthy participants > 65 years. In conclusion, the I-DHI is a reliable and valid HRQOL tool for Italian adults with OD.

Phoniatricians and otorhinolaryngologists approaching oropharyngeal dysphagia: an update on FEES.

PURPOSE: Oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) is a common phenomenon in otorhinolaryngology and phoniatrics. As both sub-disciplines have a strong tradition and clinical experience in endoscopic assessment of the upper aerodigestive tract, the implementation of fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) was an almost self-evident evolution. This review aims to provide an update on FEES and the role of phoniatricians and otorhinolaryngologists using FEES in Europe. METHODS: A narrative review of the literature was performed by experts in the field of FEES both in the clinical context and in the field of scientific research. RESULTS: FEES is the first-choice OD assessment technique for both phoniatricians and otorhinolaryngologists. FEES is becoming increasingly popular because of its usefulness, safety, low costs, wide applicability, and feasibility in different clinical settings. FEES can be performed by health professionals of varying disciplines, once adequate knowledge and skills are acquired. FEES aims to determine OD nature and severity and can provide diagnostic information regarding the underlying etiology. The direct effect of therapeutic interventions can be evaluated using FEES, contributing to design the OD management plan. Standardization of FEES protocols and metrics is still lacking. Technological innovation regarding image resolution, frame rate frequency, endoscopic light source specifications, and endoscopic rotation range has contributed to an increased diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSION: The rising number of phoniatricians and otorhinolaryngologists performing FEES contributes to the early detection and treatment of OD in an aging European population. Nevertheless, a multidisciplinary approach together with other disciplines is crucial for the success of OD management.

Magnesium alginate versus proton pump inhibitors for the treatment of laryngopharyngeal reflux: a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are commonly prescribed for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), but their efficacy remains debated. Alginates is an option for the treatment of LPR with few adverse effects. The study aimed to investigate the non-inferiority of an alginate suspension (Gastrotuss®) compared to PPIs (Omeprazole) in reducing LPR symptoms and signs. METHODS: A non-inferiority randomized controlled trial was conducted. Fifty patients with laryngopharyngeal symptoms (Reflux Symptom Index -RSI- ≥ 13) and signs (Reflux Finding Score -RFS- ≥ 7) were randomized in two treatment groups: (A) Gastrotuss® (20 ml, three daily doses) and, (B) Omeprazole (20 mg, once daily). The RSI and the RFS were assessed at baseline and after 2 months of treatment. RESULTS: Groups had similar RSI and RFS scores at baseline. From pre- to 2-month posttreatment, the mean RSI significantly decreased (p = 0.001) in alginate and PPI group (p = 0.003). The difference between groups in the RSI change was not significant (95%CI:  - 4.2-6.7, p = 0.639). The mean RFS significantly decreased in alginate (p = 0.006) and PPI groups (p = 0.006). The difference between groups in the mean change RFS was not significant (95%CI:  - 0.8; 1.4, p = 0.608). CONCLUSION: After 2 months of treatment, LPR symptoms and signs are significantly reduced irrespective of the treatment. Alginate was non-inferior to PPIs and may represent an alternative treatment to PPIs for the treatment of LPR.

Dysphagia symptoms in obstructive sleep apnea: prevalence and clinical correlates.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiology of dysphagia and its drivers in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) are poorly understood. The study aims to investigate the prevalence of dysphagia symptoms and their association with demographic and clinical factors in patients with OSA. METHODS: Patients with OSA referring to an Academic Sleep Outpatient Clinic were enrolled in a prospective study. Demographic, clinical characteristics, and OSA symptoms were collected. All patients underwent home sleep cardiorespiratory polygraphy and the Eating-Assessment Tool questionnaire (EAT-10) to investigate dysphagia symptoms. Patients with a positive EAT-10 were offered to undergo a fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) to confirm the presence of dysphagia. FEES findings were compared with a healthy control group. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess predictors of dysphagia. RESULTS: 951 patients with OSA (70% males, age 62 IQR51-71) completed the EAT-10, and 141 (15%) reported symptoms of dysphagia. Female gender (OR = 2.31), excessive daily sleepiness (OR = 2.24), number of OSA symptoms (OR = 1.25), anxiety/depression (OR = 1.89), and symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux (OR = 2.75) were significantly (p < 0.05) associated with dysphagia symptoms. Dysphagia was confirmed in 34 out of 35 symptomatic patients that accepted to undergo FEES. Patients with OSA exhibited lower bolus location at swallow onset, greater pharyngeal residue, and higher frequency and severity of penetration and aspiration events than healthy subjects (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: A consistent number of patients with OSA show symptoms of dysphagia, which are increased in females and patients with a greater OSA symptomatology, anxiety and depression, and gastroesophageal reflux. The EAT-10 appears a useful tool to guide the selection of patients at high risk of dysphagia. In clinical practice, the integration of screening for dysphagia in patients with OSA appears advisable.

ESSD Commentary on Dysphagia Management During COVID Pandemia.

Since the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 pandemic a Global Public Health Emergency, experts in swallowing are seeking guidance on service delivery and clinical procedures. The European Society for Swallowing Disorders provides considerations to support experts in swallowing disorders in clinical practice. During the COVID-19 pandemic, assessment and treatment of patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia should be provided, while at the same time balancing risk of oropharyngeal complications with that of infection of patients and healthcare professionals involved in their management. Elective, non-urgent assessment may be temporarily postponed and patients are triaged to decide whether dysphagia assessment is necessary; instrumental assessment of swallowing is performed only if processing of the instruments can be guaranteed and clinical assessment has not provided enough diagnostic information for treatment prescription. Assessment and management of oropharyngeal dysphagia is a high-risk situation as it must be considered an aerosol-generating procedure. Personal protective equipment (PPE) should be used. Telepractice is encouraged and compensatory treatments are recommended.

European white paper: oropharyngeal dysphagia in head and neck cancer.

PURPOSE: To develop a European White Paper document on oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) in head and neck cancer (HNC). There are wide variations in the management of OD associated with HNC across Europe. METHODS: Experts in the management of specific aspects of OD in HNC across Europe were delegated by their professional medical and multidisciplinary societies to contribute to this document. Evidence is based on systematic reviews, consensus-based position statements, and expert opinion. RESULTS: Twenty-four sections on HNC-specific OD topics. CONCLUSION: This European White Paper summarizes current best practice on management of OD in HNC, providing recommendations to support patients and health professionals. The body of literature and its level of evidence on diagnostics and treatment for OD in HNC remain poor. This is in the context of an expected increase in the prevalence of OD due to HNC in the near future. Contributing factors to increased prevalence include aging of our European population (including HNC patients) and an increase in human papillomavirus (HPV) related cancer, despite the introduction of HPV vaccination in various countries. We recommend timely implementation of OD screening in HNC patients while emphasizing the need for robust scientific research on the treatment of OD in HNC. Meanwhile, its management remains a challenge for European professional associations and policymakers.

The Test of Masticating and Swallowing Solids (TOMASS): Reliability and validity in patients with dysphagia.

BACKGROUND: The Test of Masticating and Swallowing Solids (TOMASS) is an international standardized swallowing assessment tool. However, its psychometric characteristics have not been analysed in patients with dysphagia. AIMS: To analyse TOMASS's (1) inter- and intra-rater reliability in a clinical population of patients with dysphagia, (2) known-group validity, (3) concurrent validity and (4) correlation with meal duration. METHODS & PROCEDURES: Two age- and gender-matched groups of 39 participants each were recruited: A group of patients with dysphagia and a control group with no history of dysphagia. The TOMASS was carried out in both populations, video-recorded and scored offline by two speech and language therapists (SLT 1 and SLT 2) (inter-rater reliability) and twice by the same SLT (intra-rater reliability). In the clinical group, the TOMASS was carried out three times: (1) to verify understanding of the required tasks, (2) performed concurrently during fibreoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) to assess validity and (3) during clinical assessment to assess reliability. TOMASS under endoscopic control was recorded and the number of white-out events was counted to compare with the number of observed swallows per cracker during standard TOMASS as a measure of concurrent validity. As additional measures of TOMASS validity, oral dental status, classified as 'functional' or 'partially functional', and duration of a standard meal were assessed by an SLT (SLT 1 or SLT 2), and then correlated with TOMASS. OUTCOME & RESULTS: TOMASS's inter- and intra-rater reliability were high (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) > 0.95) in both the clinical and the control groups. The number of masticatory cycles (p = 0.020), swallows (p = 0.013) and total time (p = 0.003) of TOMASS were significantly lower in the control group than in the clinical group. Patients with 'partially functional' oral dental status showed a significantly higher number of masticatory cycles per cracker and a longer duration of ingestion than patients with a 'functional' one. Concurrent validity suggested a substantial agreement between TOMASS and FEES in defining the number of swallows per cracker. The mean difference of the two measures was -0.02 (95% confidence interval (CI) = -1.7 to 1.2). Meal duration significantly correlated with the 'number of swallows per cracker' (r = 0.49; p = 0.002) and 'total time' (r = 0.41; p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Preliminary psychometric analysis of TOMASS in a clinical sample of outpatients with dysphagia suggests that it is a reliable and valid (specifically related to the number of swallows per cracker) tool. TOMASS's application in clinical practice to quantitatively measure solid bolus ingestion is recommended. What this paper adds What is already known on the subject The Test of Masticating and Swallowing Solids (TOMASS) is an international standardized swallowing assessment tool to evaluate oral preparation and oral phase of solids. The TOMASS' reliability and validity were tested on healthy subjects and normative data were gained. What this paper adds to existing knowledge The study provides the first data on the validity and reliability of the TOMASS in a clinical population. The TOMASS was proved to be a reliable and valid tool also in patients with dysphagia and to distinguish between patients with dysphagia and healthy subjects. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? The use of the TOMASS in clinical practice is recommended as a valid and reliable tool to quantitatively measure the ingestion of solid in patients with dysphagia.

Can You Understand Your Child? Reliability and Validity of a Parent Questionnaire: The Intelligibility in Context Scale: Italian.

INTRODUCTION: The Intelligibility in Context Scale (ICS) is a parent-report scale by which parents can rate their child's functional speech intelligibility according to seven different communicative partners. Translations, linguistic adaptations, and psychometric and norming data for ICS have been achieved in different languages. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the Italian version of the ICS (ICS-I) in terms of internal consistency, test-retest reliability, criterion validity (correlation with speech measures), and construct validity, and to investigate potential differences between mothers' and fathers' subjective ratings in ICS-I. METHODS: Italian-speaking children aged 3.0-5.11 years (n = 364), without major developmental impairment, were recruited in kindergartens. All children were independently rated by their mothers (ICS-Im) and fathers (ICS-If). A subsample of parents (n = 127) rated ICS-I twice after 3 weeks (test-retest reliability). Children were administered a naming and a word repetition task, by which speech measures were calculated: percentage of phonemes correct (PPC), percentage of consonants correct (PCC), and percentage of vowels correct (PVC). RESULTS: High internal consistency (α = 0.92) and good test-retest reliability (rs = 0.78) were found. A high (r > 0.67) correlation between the ICS-I total scores and single-item scores was found (construct validity), except for parental perception in ICS-Im and ICS-If. Moderate correlations (rs > 0.38) between the ICS-I and the PPC and PCC tasks suggested adequate criterion validity. Mothers' and fathers' ratings showed an appropriate agreement in the items acquaintances and teachers, but overall parent ratings were significantly different, with higher mean scores in ICS-Im (median = 4.57) than in ICS-If (median = 4.46), Z = -2.852, p < 0.01. CONCLUSIONS: As for other previous international studies, ICS-I presents good psychometric properties, but some differences in mothers' and fathers' scores suggest a potential parental influence in rating a child's intelligibility. Findings support cross-linguistic research, and further investigation could promote the application of ICS-I as an outcome measure in children with speech sound disorders.