Feeding and Swallowing Outcomes in Children Who Use Long-Term Ventilation: A Scoping Review.

The last two decades have seen increasing use of long-term ventilation (LTV) as an intervention in childhood. Children who use LTV have many risk factors for feeding and swallowing difficulties, including their underlying respiratory and/or neurological etiology, long hospitalizations, medical interventions, and limited exposure to oral feeding experiences. This review aimed to answer two questions: 1) 'What specific swallowing and feeding characteristics do these children experience?'; and 2) 'What impacts do these swallowing and feeding characteristics have on health status and quality of life?'. Texts were identified across bibliographic databases, reference lists, and grey literature. Studies were analyzed according to ventilation, feeding and swallowing, assessment and intervention, and quality of life parameters. Overall, 1919 papers were screened, with 31 papers included in the final data extraction process. A range of feeding and swallowing characteristics were observed, including oral secretion management difficulties, oral aversion, swallowing difficulties, and clinical signs of aspiration. Non-oral feeding was found to be the primary feeding method used. Little information on health status and quality of life was reported in scoping review texts. Children with LTV needs present with a range of feeding and swallowing concerns, and non-oral feeding is common. Further research is needed to understand the feeding and swallowing journey of this population. This will assist in future service planning and delivery, and in turn contribute to improving patient outcomes and quality of life.

Developing a care bundle for children who are eating and drinking with acknowledged risk: A Delphi study with speech and language therapists.

BACKGROUND: There is minimal research and no formal written guidance for speech and language therapists (SLTs) managing children eating and drinking with acknowledged risks (EDAR). Many SLTs lack confidence due to the complexity of these cases medically, ethically and emotionally. Guidance is recommended to aid paediatric EDAR management. AIMS: To establish consensus amongst expert paediatric SLTs regarding core components of a care bundle guiding the management of children who are EDAR. METHODS & PROCEDURES: A two-round online modified Delphi technique was used. An expert panel of UK SLTs working across paediatric settings (education, hospital, community) were recruited using snowball sampling. Both rounds comprised 36 statements related to potential components of a care bundle, which participants rated on a 7-point scale (strongly agree to strongly disagree), and one open-box question. Consensus was calculated using predetermined criteria (percentage, median and interquartile range) and the final list was ranked by level of importance (mean). OUTCOMES & RESULTS: A total of 35 participants completed round 1, with 31 completing round 2 (88.6% response rate). Thirty out of 36 statements achieved high to very high consensus. The nine statements reaching very high consensus covered topics such as documentation, capacity, safeguarding and person-centred care. CONCLUSION & IMPLICATIONS: There is a high level of consensus amongst SLTs about core components for a paediatric EDAR care bundle. This study provides a useful starting point for the future development of a care bundle to manage children who are EDAR. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject There is limited research and guidance for SLTs managing children who are EDAR. In adult populations, care bundles have been introduced with positive effects (e.g., better patient outcomes, increased standardisation of care and clinician confidence) and are seen as a promising avenue for paediatrics. What this study adds to the existing knowledge To the research team's knowledge, this is the first published Delphi study on SLT opinion around a care bundle for paediatric EDAR. There were high levels of consensus amongst UK SLTs and the results highlighted documentation, capacity, safeguarding and person-centred care as key areas in practice. Finally, the results provide a ranked list of components UK SLTs felt are important for developing a care bundle. What are the practical and clinical implications of this work? This study could be a useful starting point for creating a care bundle to support the management of children who are EDAR.

Consensus on level descriptors for a functional children's eating and drinking activity scale.

AIM: To agree wording of level descriptors for a measure of functional outcome of children's eating and drinking. METHOD: An online, modified Delphi method was used to gather feedback on current level descriptor wording and generate rewording suggestions. Thirty speech and language therapists, working in a variety of settings and geographical locations, were invited to be part of the Delphi expert panel. Content analysis was used to evaluate participants' comments and develop consensus level descriptors. Consensus for acceptable wording was set at 80% agreement. Face validity was assessed using 5-point Likert scales. RESULTS: Nineteen expert speech and language therapists (median experience 18 years) completed round one; 15 out of 19 completed round two. Level descriptor rating reached 80% agreement in two rounds. Additionally, 93% of participants agreed the scale would accurately capture change in their setting, with 87% likely to use the scale in practice. INTERPRETATION: This study has produced agreed wording for a functional measure of eating and drinking activity suitable for use with paediatrics feeding disorders, regardless of disease aetiology, presentation, age, or setting. Potential for widespread use is supported. Further evaluation of the tool's reliability and validity is required.

Co-design development of a decision guide on eating and drinking for people with severe dementia during acute hospital admissions.

INTRODUCTION: Using co-design processes, we aimed to develop an evidence-based decision guide for family carers and hospital professionals to support decision-making about eating and drinking for hospital patients with severe dementia. METHODS: Following a systematic review, we interviewed people with mild dementia, family carers and hospital professionals in England. We then held co-design workshops with family carers and hospital professionals. In parallel with the workshops, we used a matrix to synthesize data from all studies and to develop a decision guide prototype. The prototype was iteratively refined through further co-design workshops and discussions among researchers and Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) representatives. We conducted user testing for final feedback and to finalize the decision guide. RESULTS: Most participants acknowledged the limited benefits of tube feeding and would not use or want it for someone with severe dementia. However, they found decision-making processes and communication about nutrition and hydration were emotionally demanding and poorly supported in acute hospitals. The co-design groups developed the aims of the decision guide to support conversations and shared decision-making processes in acute hospitals, and help people reach evidence-based decisions. It was designed to clarify decision-making stages, provide information and elicit the values/preferences of everyone involved. It encouraged person-centred care, best-interests decision-making and multidisciplinary team working. From user testing, family carers and hospital professionals thought the decision guide could help initiate conversations and inform decisions. The final decision guide was disseminated and is being used in clinical practice in England. CONCLUSION: We used rigorous and transparent processes to co-design the decision guide with everyone involved. The decision guide may facilitate conversations about nutrition and hydration and help people reach shared decisions that meet the needs and preferences of people with severe dementia. Future evaluation is required to test its real-world impacts. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: People with mild dementia, family carers and hospital professionals contributed to the design of the decision guide through the interviews and co-design workshops. PPI members helped design study procedures and materials and prepare this manuscript.

How do people living with dementia perceive eating and drinking difficulties? A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Eating and drinking problems are common among people living with later-stage dementia, yet few studies have explored their perspectives. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore how people living with mild dementia understand possible future eating and drinking problems and their perspectives on assistance. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. SETTING: Community. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 19 people living with mild dementia. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Five themes were identified: (i) awareness of eating and drinking problems; (ii) food and drink representing an individual's identity and agency; (iii) delegating later decisions about eating and drinking to family carers; (iv) acceptability of eating and drinking options; and (v) eating and drinking towards the end of life. For people living with mild dementia, possible later eating and drinking problems could feel irrelevant and action may be postponed until they occur. Fears of being a burden to family and of being treated like a child may explain reluctance to discuss such future problems. People living with mild dementia might wish to preserve their agency and maintain good quality of life, rather than be kept alive at later stages by artificial nutrition and hydration. CONCLUSION: For people with mild dementia, eating and drinking problems may seem unrelated to them and so get left undiscussed. Negative connotations regarding eating and drinking problems may hinder the discussion. The optimal time to discuss possible future problems with eating and drinking with people with mild dementia may need an individual approach.

Enteral tube feeding for people with severe dementia.

BACKGROUND: The balance of benefits and harms associated with enteral tube feeding for people with severe dementia is not clear. An increasing number of guidelines highlight the lack of evidenced benefit and potential risks of enteral tube feeding. In some areas of the world, the use of enteral tube feeding is decreasing, and in other areas it is increasing. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of enteral tube feeding for people with severe dementia who develop problems with eating and swallowing or who have reduced food and fluid intake. SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's register, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases and two trials registers on 14 April 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), or controlled non-randomised studies. Our population of interest was adults of any age with a diagnosis of primary degenerative dementia of any cause, with severe cognitive and functional impairment, and poor nutritional intake. Eligible studies evaluated the effectiveness and complications of enteral tube feeding via a nasogastric or gastrostomy tube, or via jejunal post-pyloric feeding, in comparison with standard care or enhanced standard care, such as an intervention to promote oral intake. Our primary outcomes were survival time, quality of life, and pressure ulcers. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors screened citations and two review authors assessed full texts of potentially eligible studies against inclusion criteria. One review author extracted data, which were then checked independently by a second review author. We used the 'Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies of Interventions' (ROBINS-I) tool to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. Risk of confounding was assessed against a pre-agreed list of key potential confounding variables. Our primary outcomes were survival time, quality of life, and pressure ulcers. Results were not suitable for meta-analysis, so we presented them narratively. We presented results separately for studies of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) feeding, nasogastric tube feeding and studies using mixed or unspecified enteral tube feeding methods. We used GRADE methods to assess the overall certainty of the evidence related to each outcome for each study. MAIN RESULTS: We found no eligible RCTs. We included fourteen controlled, non-randomised studies. All the included studies compared outcomes between groups of people who had been assigned to enteral tube feeding or oral feeding by prior decision of a healthcare professional. Some studies controlled for a range of confounding factors, but there were high or very high risks of bias due to confounding in all studies, and high or critical risks of selection bias in some studies. Four studies with 36,816 participants assessed the effect of PEG feeding on survival time. None found any evidence of effects on survival time (low-certainty evidence). Three of four studies using mixed or unspecified enteral tube feeding methods in 310 participants (227 enteral tube feeding, 83 no enteral tube feeding) found them to be associated with longer survival time. The fourth study (1386 participants: 135 enteral tube feeding, 1251 no enteral tube feeding) found no evidence of an effect. The certainty of this body of evidence is very low. One study of PEG feeding (4421 participants: 1585 PEG, 2836 no enteral tube feeding) found PEG feeding increased the risk of pressure ulcers (moderate-certainty evidence). Two of three studies reported an increase in the number of pressure ulcers in those receiving mixed or unspecified enteral tube feeding (234 participants: 88 enteral tube feeding, 146 no enteral tube feeding). The third study found no effect (very-low certainty evidence).  Two studies of nasogastric tube feeding did not report data on survival time or pressure ulcers. None of the included studies assessed quality of life. Only one study, using mixed methods of enteral tube feeding, reported on pain and comfort, finding no difference between groups. In the same study, a higher proportion of carers reported very heavy burden in the enteral tube feeding group compared to no enteral tube feeding. Two studies assessed the effect of nasogastric tube feeding on mortality (236 participants: 144 nasogastric group, 92 no enteral tube feeding). One study of 67 participants (14 nasogastric, 53 no enteral tube feeding) found nasogastric feeding was associated with increased mortality risk. The second study found no difference in mortality between groups. The certainty of this evidence is very low. Results on mortality for those using PEG or mixed methods of enteral tube feeding were mixed and the certainty of evidence was very low. There was some evidence from two studies for enteral tube feeding improving nutritional parameters, but this was very low-certainty evidence. Five studies reported a variety of harm-related outcomes with inconsistent results. The balance of evidence suggested increased risk of pneumonia with enteral tube feeding. None of the included studies assessed behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that tube feeding improves survival; improves quality of life; reduces pain; reduces mortality; decreases behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia; leads to better nourishment; improves family or carer outcomes such as depression, anxiety, carer burden, or satisfaction with care; and no indication of harm. We found some evidence that there is a clinically significant risk of pressure ulcers from enteral tube feeding. Future research should focus on better reporting and matching of control and intervention groups, and clearly defined interventions, measuring all the outcomes referred to here.

Surface Electromyographic Biofeedback and the Effortful Swallow Exercise for Stroke-Related Dysphagia and in Healthy Ageing.

Dysphagia is common after stroke, leading to adverse outcome. The Effortful Swallow (ES) is recommended to improve swallowing but it is not known if dysphagic patients can increase muscle activity during the exercise or if age affects performance. Providing surface electromyographic (sEMG) biofeedback during dysphagia therapy may enhance exercise completion, but this has not been investigated and the technique's acceptability to patients is not known. Aims: To determine if age or post-stroke dysphagia affect the ability to increase submental muscle activity during the ES, if sEMG biofeedback improves ES performance and if sEMG is an acceptable addition to therapy. In a Phase I study submental sEMG amplitudes were measured from 15 people with dysphagia < 3 months post-stroke and 85 healthy participants aged 18-89 years during swallowing (NS) and when they performed the ES with and without sEMG biofeedback. Participant feedback was collected via questionnaire. Measurements were compared with repeated measures ANOVA and age effects were examined with linear regression. Both groups produced significantly greater muscle activity for the ES than NS (p < 0.001) and significantly increased activity with biofeedback (p < 0.001) with no effect of age. Participant feedback about sEMG was very positive; over 98% would be happy to use it regularly. The ES is a physiologically beneficial dysphagia exercise, increasing muscle activity during swallowing. sEMG biofeedback further enhances performance and is considered an acceptable technique by patients. These findings support the potential application of sEMG biofeedback and the ES in dysphagia therapy in stroke, justifying further investigation of patient outcome.

Nutrition and hydration for people living with dementia near the end of life: A qualitative systematic review.

AIMS: To synthesize the qualitative evidence of the views and experiences of people living with dementia, family carers, and practitioners on practice related to nutrition and hydration of people living with dementia who are nearing end of life. DESIGN: Systematic review and narrative synthesis of qualitative studies. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL. REVIEW METHODS: Databases were searched for qualitative studies from January 2000-February 2020. Quantitative studies, or studies reporting on biological mechanisms, assessments, scales or diagnostic tools were excluded. Results were synthesized using a narrative synthesis approach with thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twenty studies were included; 15 explored the views of practitioners working with people living with dementia in long-term care settings or in hospitals. Four themes were developed: challenges of supporting nutrition and hydration; balancing the views of all parties involved with 'the right thing to do'; national context and sociocultural influences; and strategies to support nutrition and hydration near the end of life in dementia. CONCLUSION: The complexity of supporting nutrition and hydration near the end of life for someone living with dementia relates to national context, lack of knowledge, and limited planning while the person can communicate. IMPACT: This review summarizes practitioners and families' experiences and highlights the need to include people living with dementia in studies to help understand their views and preferences about nutrition and hydration near the end of life; and those of their families supporting them in the community. The review findings are relevant to multidisciplinary teams who can learn from strategies to help with nutrition and hydration decisions and support.

SIP SMART: a parallel group randomised feasibility trial of a tailored pre-treatment swallowing intervention package compared with usual care for patients with head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: Dysphagia or difficulty in swallowing affects quality of life for most patients with head and neck cancer. SIP SMART - [Swallowing Intervention Package: Self-Monitoring, Assessment, Rehabilitation Training] aims to improve post-treatment swallowing outcomes through a targeted and tailored pre-treatment intervention. This feasibility study assessed 1) recruitment and retention, 2) patient acceptability of randomisation and participation, 3) patient adherence, and 4) sought to identify a suitable primary outcome for a definitive trial, including sample size estimation. METHODS: This two-arm parallel group non-blinded randomised feasibility trial took place within a head and neck centre at a teaching hospital in London, UK. Patients newly diagnosed with stage III/IV head and neck cancer were recruited and underwent 6-month follow-up. Patients were randomised to SIP-SMART or usual care via an online web-based system. SIP SMART comprised two 45-min consultations including a baseline clinical and instrumental swallowing assessment, relevant educational information, targeted swallowing exercises, and specific behaviour change strategies to increase exercise adherence. Usual care comprised a single session including a baseline clinical assessment and generic information about the likely impact of treatment on swallowing. RESULTS: A total of 106 patients were identified at pre-screening, 70 were assessed for eligibility. Twenty-six patients did not meet eligibility criteria [0.37, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.49]. Five of 44 [0.11, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.24] eligible patients were not approached by researchers during clinic. Seven [0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.33] of the 39 approached declined participation. Target recruitment (32 consented patients) was achieved within the timeframe. At 6-months 29/32 [0.91, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.97] patients remained in the trial. Acceptability of randomisation and participation in the intervention was favourable, and adherence to the exercises exceeded the pre-defined 35% minimum criterion. The MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory swallow related quality of life measure was selected as the most suitable primary outcome for sample size estimation. No adverse effects arose from the intervention, or study participation. CONCLUSIONS: A definitive trial of the SIP SMART intervention compared to usual care is feasible and can be undertaken with patients with head and neck cancer treated within the NHS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN40215425, registered retrospectively.

Rating the intelligibility of dysarthic speech amongst people with Parkinson's Disease: a comparison of trained and untrained listeners.

Intelligibility of speech is a key outcome in speech and language therapy (SLT) and research. SLT students frequently participate as raters of intelligibility but we lack information about whether they rate intelligibility in the same way as the general public. This paper aims to determine if there is a difference in the intelligibility ratings made by SLT students (trained in speech related topics) compared to individuals from the general public (untrained). The SLT students were in year 2 of a BSc programme or the first 6 months of a MSc programme. We recorded 10 speakers with Parkinson's disease (PD) related speech reading aloud the words and sentences from the Assessment of Intelligibility of Dysarthric Speech. These speech recordings were rated for intelligibility by 'trained' raters and 'untrained' raters. The effort required to understand the speech was also reported. There were no significant differences in the measures of intelligibility from the trained and untrained raters for words or sentences after adjusting for speaker by including them as a covariate in the model. There was a slight increase in effort reported by the untrained raters for the sentences. This difference in reported effort was not evident with the words. SLT students can be recruited alongside individuals from the general public as naïve raters for evaluating intelligibility in people with speech disorders.

Modifying the consistency of food and fluids for swallowing difficulties in dementia.

BACKGROUND: People with dementia can have feeding and swallowing difficulties (dysphagia). Modification of the consistency of food or fluids, or both, is a common management strategy. However, diet modification can affect quality of life and may lead to dehydration and malnutrition. Evidence on the benefits and risks of modifying food and fluids is mandatory to improve the care of people with dementia and dysphagia. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and adverse effects associated with modifying the consistency of food and fluids in improving oral intake and eliminating aspiration in adults with dysphagia and dementia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS (the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group), the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via Ovid SP, Embase via Ovid SP, PsycINFO via Ovid SP, CINAHL via EBSCOhost, LILACS via BIREME, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) Portal on 9 May 2018. We also checked the reference lists of relevant articles to identify any additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and cluster-RCTs published in any language that measured any of the outcomes of interest. We included trials with adults with a clinical diagnosis of dementia with symptoms and signs of dysphagia confirmed on instrumental assessment. We included participants with all types, stages and severities of dementia. Control groups received either no intervention or interventions not involving diet modification or modification to sensory properties of food. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed for inclusion all potential studies identified. Data were extracted independently along with assessment of methodological quality using standard Cochrane methods. We contacted study authors for additional unpublished information. MAIN RESULTS: No trials on modification of food met the inclusion criteria. We included two studies that examined modification to fluids. Both were part of the same large multicentre trial and included people with dementia and people with or without dementia and Parkinson's disease. Participation in the second trial was determined by results from the first trial. With unpublished data supplied by study authors, we examined data from participants with dementia only. The first study, a cross-over trial, investigated the immediate effects on aspiration of two viscosities of liquids (nectar thick and honey thick) compared to regular liquids in 351 participants with dementia using videofluoroscopy. Regular liquids with a chin down head posture, as well as regular liquids without any intervention were also compared. The sequence of interventions during videofluoroscopy may have influenced response to intervention. The second study, a parallel designed RCT, compared the effect of nectar and honey thick liquids with a chin down head posture over a three-month period in a subgroup of 260 participants with dementia. Outcomes were pneumonia and adverse intervention effects. Honey thick liquids, which are more consistent with descriptors for 'spoon thick' or 'extremely thick' liquids, showed a more positive impact on immediate elimination of aspiration during videofluoroscopy, but this consistency showed more adverse effects in the second follow-up study. During the second three-month follow-up trial, there were a greater number of incidents of pneumonia in participants receiving honey thick liquids than those receiving nectar thick liquids or taking regular liquids with a chin down posture. There were no deaths classified as 'definitely related' to the type of fluids prescribed. Neither trial addressed quality of life. Risk of bias for both studies is high. The overall quality of evidence for outcomes in this review is low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We are uncertain about the immediate and long-term effects of modifying the consistency of fluid for swallowing difficulties in dementia as too few studies have been completed. There may be differences in outcomes depending on the grade of thickness of fluids and the sequence of interventions trialled in videofluoroscopy for people with dementia. Clinicians should be aware that while thickening fluids may have an immediate positive effect on swallowing, the long-term impact of thickened fluids on the health of the person with dementia should be considered. Further high-quality clinical trials are required.

Swallowing interventions for the treatment of dysphagia after head and neck cancer: a systematic review of behavioural strategies used to promote patient adherence to swallowing exercises.

BACKGROUND: Dysphagia is a significant side-effect following treatment for head and neck cancers, yet poor adherence to swallowing exercises is frequently reported in intervention studies. Behaviour change techniques (BCTs) can be used to improve adherence, but no review to date has described the techniques or indicated which may be more associated with improved swallowing outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to identify behavioural strategies in swallowing interventions, and to explore any relationships between these strategies and intervention effects. Randomised and quasi-randomised studies of head and neck cancer patients were included. Behavioural interventions to improve swallowing were eligible provided a valid measure of swallowing function was reported. A validated and comprehensive list of 93 discrete BCTs was used to code interventions. Analysis was conducted via a structured synthesis approach. RESULTS: Fifteen studies (8 randomised) were included, and 20 different BCTs were each identified in at least one intervention. The BCTs identified in almost all interventions were: instruction on how to perform the behavior, setting behavioural goals and action planning. The BCTs that occurred more frequently in effective interventions, were: practical social support, behavioural practice, self-monitoring of behaviour and credible source for example a skilled clinician delivering the intervention. The presence of identical BCTs in comparator groups may diminish effects. CONCLUSIONS: Swallowing interventions feature multiple components that may potentially impact outcomes. This review maps the behavioural components of reported interventions and provides a method to consistently describe these components going forward. Future work may seek to test the most effective BCTs, to inform optimisation of swallowing interventions.

Patient Experiences of Swallowing Exercises After Head and Neck Cancer: A Qualitative Study Examining Barriers and Facilitators Using Behaviour Change Theory.

Poor patient adherence to swallowing exercises is commonly reported in the dysphagia literature on patients treated for head and neck cancer. Establishing the effectiveness of exercise interventions for this population may be undermined by patient non-adherence. The purpose of this study was to explore the barriers and facilitators to exercise adherence from a patient perspective, and to determine the best strategies to reduce the barriers and enhance the facilitators. In-depth interviews were conducted on thirteen patients. We used a behaviour change framework and model [Theoretical domains framework and COM-B (Capability-opportunity-motivation-behaviour) model] to inform our interview schedule and structure our results, using a content analysis approach. The most frequent barrier identified was psychological capability. This was highlighted by patient reports of not clearly understanding reasons for the exercises, forgetting to do the exercises and not having a system to keep track. Other barriers included feeling overwhelmed by information at a difficult time (lack of automatic motivation) and pain and fatigue (lack of physical capability). Main facilitators included having social support from family and friends, the desire to prevent negative consequences such as long-term tube feeding (reflective motivation), having the skills to do the exercises (physical capability), having a routine or trigger and receiving feedback on the outcome of doing exercises (automatic motivation). Linking these findings back to the theoretical model allows for a more systematic selection of theory-based strategies that may enhance the design of future swallowing exercise interventions for patients with head and neck cancer.

The influence of food texture and liquid consistency modification on swallowing physiology and function: a systematic review.

Texture modification has become one of the most common forms of intervention for dysphagia, and is widely considered important for promoting safe and efficient swallowing. However, to date, there is no single convention with respect to the terminology used to describe levels of liquid thickening or food texture modification for clinical use. As a first step toward building a common taxonomy, a systematic review was undertaken to identify empirical evidence describing the impact of liquid consistency and food texture on swallowing behavior. A multi-engine search yielded 10,147 non-duplicate articles, which were screened for relevance. A team of ten international researchers collaborated to conduct full-text reviews for 488 of these articles, which met the study inclusion criteria. Of these, 36 articles were found to contain specific information comparing oral processing or swallowing behaviors for at least two liquid consistencies or food textures. Qualitative synthesis revealed two key trends with respect to the impact of thickening liquids on swallowing: thicker liquids reduce the risk of penetration-aspiration, but also increase the risk of post-swallow residue in the pharynx. The literature was insufficient to support the delineation of specific viscosity boundaries or other quantifiable material properties related to these clinical outcomes. With respect to food texture, the literature pointed to properties of hardness, cohesiveness, and slipperiness as being relevant both for physiological behaviors and bolus flow patterns. The literature suggests a need to classify food and fluid behavior in the context of the physiological processes involved in oral transport and flow initiation.

Erratum to: The Influence of Food Texture and Liquid Consistency Modification on Swallowing Physiology and Function: A Systematic Review.

Erratum to: Dysphagia DOI 10.1007/s00455-014-9578-x. In the original version of this article, Fig. 1 was published incorrectly. The corrected figure is given below.

An observational study of adults with Down syndrome eating independently.

This study examined the oral feeding in a group of adults with Down syndrome. None of the 23 participants in the study had reported oral feeding difficulties, and all independently ate a full oral diet (food and liquids). Observations were made during the consumption of one meal and one drink. The eating and drinking behaviours observed included eating rate and ability to keep food in the mouth, and these were considered in conjunction with oral and pharyngeal phase skills and difficulties. Coughing, an overt sign of possible aspiration with its attendant risk of upper respiratory tract infection, was seen in 56.5 % of participants. In addition, several of the observed oral feeding behaviours of this group of individuals may be socially unacceptable and therefore likely to compromise quality of life. A number of behaviours with implications for both health and quality of life may be amenable to simple behaviour modification or to changes to the environment. Further study into the causes of these oral feeding difficulties, their implications for social integration, and their potential remediation is required.

Feeding and swallowing outcomes of children receiving long-term ventilation: A scoping review protocol.

BACKGROUND: The last three decades have seen a growth in the number of children requiring long-term ventilation. Children with long-term ventilation present with underlying respiratory and neurological conditions that place them at risk of feeding and swallowing difficulties. To date, a scoping review or systematic review investigating the feeding and swallowing outcomes of children with long-term ventilation needs has not been conducted. AIMS: This paper describes a protocol for a scoping review of the feeding and swallowing outcomes of children receiving long-term ventilation. METHODS: This scoping review protocol will utilize the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodology guideline. Our review will focus on the feeding and swallowing outcomes of children aged 0 to 18 years with long-term ventilation needs. A full search strategy initially created by the authors and a research librarian was conducted on the PubMed database. Following this, pilot testing took place to determine discrepancies in eligibility criteria. A full search strategy will be conducted across several databases. A data extraction form has been developed by the authors and will be used during the scoping review process. DISCUSSION: This protocol has been created to provide a rigorous and comprehensive basis for undertaking a scoping review. All necessary steps have been completed in order to commence the scoping review. REGISTRATION: This scoping review protocol was registered on Open Science Framework on the 26th November 2021 (Registration DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/NQBPD).

The characteristics of eating, drinking and oro-pharyngeal swallowing difficulties associated with repaired oesophageal atresia/tracheo-oesophageal fistula: a systematic review and meta-proportional analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Eating, drinking and swallowing difficulties are commonly reported morbidities for individuals born with OA/TOF. This study aimed to determine the nature and prevalence of eating, drinking and oro-pharyngeal swallowing difficulties reported in this population. METHOD: A systematic review and meta-proportional analysis were conducted (PROSPERO: CRD42020207263). MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science databases and grey literature were searched. Quantitative and qualitative data were extracted relating to swallow impairment, use of mealtime adaptations and eating and drinking-related quality of life. Quantitative data were summarised using narrative and meta-proportional analysis methods. Qualitative data were synthesised using a meta-aggregation approach. Where quantitative and qualitative data described the same phenomenon, a convergent segregated approach was used to synthesise data. RESULTS: Sixty-five studies were included. Six oro-pharyngeal swallow characteristics were identified, and pooled prevalence calculated: aspiration (24%), laryngeal penetration (6%), oral stage dysfunction (11%), pharyngeal residue (13%), nasal regurgitation (7%), delayed swallow initiation (31%). Four patient-reported eating/drinking difficulties were identified, and pooled prevalence calculated: difficulty swallowing solids (45%), difficulty swallowing liquids (6%), odynophagia (30%), coughing when eating (38%). Three patient-reported mealtime adaptations were identified, and pooled prevalence calculated: need for water when eating (49%), eating slowly (37%), modifying textures (28%). Mixed methods synthesis of psychosocial impacts identified 34% of parents experienced mealtime anxiety and 25% report challenging mealtime behaviours reflected in five qualitative themes: fear and trauma associated with eating and drinking, isolation and a lack of support, being aware and grateful, support to cope and loss. CONCLUSIONS: Eating and drinking difficulties are common in adults and children with repaired OA/TOF. Oro-pharyngeal swallowing difficulties may be more prevalent than previously reported. Eating, drinking and swallowing difficulties can impact on psychological well-being and quality of life, for the individual and parents/family members. Long-term, multi-disciplinary follow-up is warranted.

The effect of two speech and language approaches on speech problems in people with Parkinson's disease: the PD COMM RCT.

Background: Speech impairments are common with Parkinson's disease (reported prevalence 68%), increasing conversational demands, reliance on family and social withdrawal. Objective(s): The PD COMM trial compared the clinical and cost-effectiveness of two speech and language therapy approaches: Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD and National Health Service speech and language therapy for the treatment of speech or voice problems in people with Parkinson's disease to no speech and language therapy (control) and against each other. Design: PD COMM is a phase III, multicentre, three-arm, unblinded, randomised controlled trial. Participants were randomised in a 1 : 1 : 1 ratio to control, National Health Service speech and language therapy or Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD via a central computer-generated programme, using a minimisation procedure with a random element, to ensure allocation concealment. Mixed-methods process and health economic evaluations were conducted. Setting: United Kingdom outpatient and home settings. Participants: People with idiopathic Parkinson's disease, with self-reported or carer-reported speech or voice problems. We excluded people with dementia, laryngeal pathology and those within 24 months of previous speech and language therapy. Interventions: The Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD intervention included maximum effort drills and high-effort speech production tasks delivered over four 50-minute therapist-led personalised sessions per week, for 4 weeks with prescribed daily home practice. National Health Service speech and language therapy content and dosage reflected local non-Lee Silverman Voice Treatment speech and language therapy practices, usually 1 hour, once weekly, for 6 weeks. Trained, experienced speech and language therapists or assistants provided interventions. The control was no speech and language therapy until the trial was completed. Main outcome measures: Primary outcome: Voice Handicap Index total score at 3 months. Secondary outcomes: Voice Handicap Index subscales, Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39; Questionnaire on Acquired Speech Disorders; EuroQol-5D-5L; ICEpop Capabilities Measure for Older Adults; Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire - Carers; resource utilisation; and adverse events. Assessments were completed pre-randomisation and at 3, 6 and 12 months post randomisation. Results: Three hundred and eighty-eight participants were randomised to Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD (n = 130), National Health Service speech and language therapy (n = 129) and control (n = 129). The impact of voice problems at 3 months after randomisation was lower for Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD participants than control [-8.0 (99% confidence interval: -13.3, -2.6); p = 0.001]. There was no evidence of improvement for those with access to National Health Service speech and language therapy when compared to control [1.7 (99% confidence interval: -3.8, 7.1); p = 0.4]. Participants randomised to Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD reported a lower impact of their voice problems than participants randomised to National Health Service speech and language therapy [99% confidence interval: -9.6 (-14.9, -4.4); p < 0.0001]. There were no reports of serious adverse events. Staff were confident with the trial interventions; a range of patient and therapist enablers of implementing Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD were identified. The economic evaluation results suggested Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD was more expensive and more effective than control or National Health Service speech and language therapy but was not cost-effective with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £197,772 per quality-adjusted life-year gained and £77,017 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, respectively. Limitations: The number of participants recruited to the trial did not meet the pre-specified power. Conclusions: People that had access to Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD described a significantly greater reduction in the impact of their Parkinson's disease-related speech problems 3 months after randomisation compared to people that had no speech and language therapy. There was no evidence of a difference between National Health Service speech and language therapy and those that received no speech and language therapy. Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD resulted in a significantly lower impact of voice problems compared to National Health Service speech and language therapy 3 months after randomisation which was still present after 12 months; however, Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD was not found to be cost-effective. Future work: Implementing Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD in the National Health Service and identifying alternatives to Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD for those who cannot tolerate it. Investigation of less costly alternative options for Lee Silverman Voice Treatment delivery require investigation, with economic evaluation using a preference-based outcome measure that captures improvement in communication. Study registration: This study is registered as ISRCTN12421382. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 10/135/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 58. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Most people with Parkinson's disease develop difficulties with their speech and voice. Communicating becomes difficult. This affects their relationships, work, social life and how they feel about themselves. Our PD COMM trial compared two types of speech and language therapy to find out if they helped the speech and voice problems people with Parkinson's have. We measured changes in the way their voice and speech problems affected their lives and how much therapy cost the National Health Service and families. Everyone taking part had speech or voice problems because of their Parkinson's disease. People could not take part if they had dementia, evidence of laryngeal pathology or previous laryngeal surgery or received speech and therapy for Parkinson's disease in the last 2 years. People who agreed to take part joined one of three groups, which were alike except for the therapy they received. A computer decided which group they joined by chance. National Health Service speech and language therapy Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD No speech and language therapy for 12 months The 388 people who took part came from 41 outpatient clinics in Scotland, England and Wales. Most were older men. The people that received Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD felt better about their speech and voice after 3 months compared to people in the other groups. A year later, they still felt better about it. People that received National Health Service therapy had no benefit compared to people with no access to therapy. Analysis of cost-effectiveness indicated that Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD did not offer value for money and the intervention cost more because more speech and language therapy time was needed to deliver it. Our next question is to ask how we can provide Lee Silverman Voice Treatment LOUD in a way that costs less, for example, using therapy assistants and computer packages or at home. Clear speech and language therapy approaches for people with Parkinson's disease and speech or voice problems should be tested in trials that measure changes in people's lives.

Lee Silverman voice treatment versus NHS speech and language therapy versus control for dysarthria in people with Parkinson's disease (PD COMM): pragmatic, UK based, multicentre, three arm, parallel group, unblinded, randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical effectiveness of two speech and language therapy approaches versus no speech and language therapy for dysarthria in people with Parkinson's disease. DESIGN: Pragmatic, UK based, multicentre, three arm, parallel group, unblinded, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: The speech and language therapy interventions were delivered in outpatient or home settings between 26 September 2016 and 16 March 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 388 people with Parkinson's disease and dysarthria. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups (1:1:1): 130 to Lee Silverman voice treatment (LSVT LOUD), 129 to NHS speech and language therapy, and 129 to no speech and language therapy. LSVT LOUD consisted of four, face-to-face or remote, 50 min sessions each week delivered over four weeks. Home based practice activities were set for up to 5-10 mins daily on treatment days and 15 mins twice daily on non-treatment days. Dosage for the NHS speech and language therapy was determined by the local therapist in response to the participants' needs (estimated from prior research that NHS speech and language therapy participants would receive an average of one session per week over six to eight weeks). Local practices for NHS speech and language therapy were accepted, except for those within the LSVT LOUD protocol. Analyses were based on the intention to treat principle. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was total score at three months of self-reported voice handicap index. RESULTS: People who received LSVT LOUD reported lower voice handicap index scores at three months after randomisation than those who did not receive speech and language therapy (-8.0 points (99% confidence interval -13.3 to -2.6); P<0.001). No evidence suggests a difference in voice handicap index scores between NHS speech and language therapy and no speech and language therapy (1.7 points (-3.8 to 7.1); P=0.43). Patients in the LSVT LOUD group also reported lower voice handicap index scores than did those randomised to NHS speech and language therapy (-9.6 points (-14.9 to -4.4); P<0.001). 93 adverse events (predominately vocal strain) were reported in the LSVT LOUD group, 46 in the NHS speech and language therapy group, and none in the no speech and language therapy group. No serious adverse events were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: LSVT LOUD was more effective at reducing the participant reported impact of voice problems than was no speech and language therapy and NHS speech and language therapy. NHS speech and language therapy showed no evidence of benefit compared with no speech and language therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN12421382.