Using co-design methods to develop new personalised support for people living with Long Covid: The 'LISTEN' intervention.

INTRODUCTION: Many Covid-19 survivors are living with unresolved, relapsing and remitting symptoms and no 'one size' of treatment is likely to be effective for everyone. Supported self-management for the varied symptoms of Long Covid (LC) is recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the United Kingdom. We aimed to develop a new personalised support intervention for people living with LC using a structured co-design framework to guide replication and evaluation. METHODS: We used the improvement methodology, Experience-Based Co-Design, in an accelerated form to harness the collective experiences of people with LC. Incorporating evidence from 'Bridges Self-Management' (Bridges) an approach in which healthcare professionals (HCPs)are trained to support knowledge, confidence and skills of individuals living with long term conditions. Co-designed resources are also central to Bridges. Adults who self-identified as living with or recovered from LC, from England or Wales, aged 18 years and over were recruited, and HCPs, with experience of supporting people with LC. Participants took part in a series of small co-design group meetings and larger mixed meetings to agree priorities, core principles and generate resources and intervention content. RESULTS: People with LC (n = 28), and HCPs (n = 9) supported co-design of a book (hard-copy and digital form) to be used in 1:1 support sessions with a trained HCP. Co-design stages prioritised stories about physical symptoms first, and psychological and social challenges which followed, nonlinear journeys and reconceptualising stability as progress, rich descriptions of strategies and links to reputable advice and support for navigating healthcare services. Co-design enabled formulation of eight core intervention principles which underpinned the training and language used by HCPs and fidelity assessments. CONCLUSION: We have developed a new personalised support intervention, with core principles to be used in one-to-one sessions delivered by trained HCPs, with a new co-designed book as a prompt to build personalised strategies and plans using narratives, ideas, and solutions from other people with LC. Effectiveness and cost effectiveness of the 'LISTEN' intervention will be evaluated in a randomised controlled trial set within the context of the updated Framework for Developing and Evaluating Complex Interventions. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The LISTEN Public and Patient Involvement (PPI) group comprised seven people living with LC. They all contributed to the design of this study and five members were part of a larger co-design community described in this paper. They have contributed to this paper by interpreting stages of intervention design and analysis of results. Three members of our PPI group are co-authors of this paper.

Transitions in tracheostomy care: from childhood to adulthood.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to explore the evidence around children and young people who require a tracheostomy and transition into adult services, reflecting on the challenges and considerations for clinical practice as these needs increase. RECENT FINDINGS: There are a lack of data on the incidence and prevalence of children and young people with a tracheostomy transitioning to adult services for ongoing care. There are significant variations in care needs, technology and previous experiences that demand more than a simple handover process. Examples of service models that support the transition of care exist, however these lack specificity for children and young people with a tracheostomy. SUMMARY: Further exploration of the needs of children and young people requiring airway technology is indicated, particularly considering the short and long-term education, health, and social care needs.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a personalised self-management intervention for living with long COVID: protocol for the LISTEN randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Individuals living with long COVID experience multiple, interacting and fluctuating symptoms which can have a dramatic impact on daily living. The aim of the Long Covid Personalised Self-managemenT support EvaluatioN (LISTEN) trial is to evaluate effects of the LISTEN co-designed self-management support intervention for non-hospitalised people living with long COVID on participation in routine activities, social participation, emotional well-being, quality of life, fatigue, and self-efficacy. Cost-effectiveness will also be evaluated, and a detailed process evaluation carried out to understand how LISTEN is implemented. METHODS: The study is a pragmatic randomised effectiveness and cost-effectiveness trial in which a total of 558 non-hospitalised people with long COVID will be randomised to either the LISTEN intervention or usual care. Recruitment strategies have been developed with input from the LISTEN Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) advisory group and a social enterprise, Diversity and Ability, to ensure inclusivity. Eligible participants can self-refer into the trial via a website or be referred by long COVID services. All participants complete a range of self-reported outcome measures, online, at baseline, 6 weeks, and 3 months post randomisation (the trial primary end point). Those randomised to the LISTEN intervention are offered up to six one-to-one sessions with LISTEN-trained intervention practitioners and given a co-designed digital resource and paper-based book. A detailed process evaluation will be conducted alongside the trial to inform implementation approaches should the LISTEN intervention be found effective and cost-effective. DISCUSSION: The LISTEN trial is evaluating a co-designed, personalised self-management support intervention (the LISTEN intervention) for non-hospitalised people living with long COVID. The design has incorporated extensive strategies to minimise participant burden and maximise access. Whilst the duration of follow-up is limited, all participants are approached to consent for long-term follow-up (subject to additional funding being secured). TRIAL REGISTRATION: LISTEN ISRCTN36407216. Registered on 27/01/2022.

Oropharyngeal Dysphagia in Acute Cervical Spinal Cord Injury: A Literature Review.

Dysphagia (swallowing impairment) is a frequent complication of cervical spinal cord injury (cSCI). Recently published national guidance in the UK on rehabilitation after traumatic injury confirmed that people with cSCI are at risk for dysphagia and require early evaluation while remaining nil by mouth [National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Rehabilitation after traumatic injury (NG211), 2022, https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng21 ]. While the pathogenesis and pathophysiology of dysphagia in cSCI remains unclear, numerous risk factors have been identified in the literature. This review aims to summarize the literature on the risk factors, presentation, assessment, and management of dysphagia in patients with cSCI. A bespoke approach to dysphagia management, that accounts for the multiple system impairment in cSCI, is presented; the overarching aim of which is to support effective management of dysphagia in patients with cSCI to prevent adverse clinical consequences.

Family carers' experiences of dysphagia after a stroke: An exploratory study of spouses living in a large metropolitan city.

BACKGROUND: People with post-stroke dysphagia often require informal care from family to facilitate safe swallowing, modify food/drink or administer tube-feeds. Previous survey studies have found dysphagia may increase family caregiver burden. However, the experiences of family members in this population have not been fully explored. AIMS: To explore family members' experiences of living with a spouse with post-stroke dysphagia. METHODS & PROCEDURES: This exploratory qualitative study used one-to-one semi-structured interviews to explore family members' experiences. They were asked open questions about previous eating routines, dysphagia onset, their role and future hopes. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically with an inductive approach to determine key features of family members' experiences. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Five spouses aged 70-93 years participated. Their relatives' strokes happened 3 months to 3 years before the interview. Five themes were identified: 'I do all of it'; making sense of dysphagia; emotional responses; reflecting on relationships; and redefining lifestyle. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: It is important to consider family members' perspectives as they often provide vital care to loved-ones with dysphagia. In relation to eating and drinking, maintaining elements of previous routines seems important to families. Healthcare professionals should consider these when making recommendations for rehabilitation. Family members have differing perspectives of the comparative impact of dysphagia; patient and family priorities should be explored for healthcare professionals to provide better-targeted support. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Informal caregivers, often spouses, play a vital role in supporting the health and well-being of older people with health conditions. The presence of post-stroke dysphagia may present increased challenges for the informal caregiver. There are limited studies qualitatively exploring the experiences of informal caregivers in this population. What this paper adds to existing knowledge Current health and social care provision for this population leaves informal caregivers feeling they have been left to manage dysphagia alone. Informal caregivers demonstrate a breadth of knowledge about their spouse's dysphagia, problem-solving effective solutions. Informal caregivers have a range of interpretations of the nature and cause of dysphagia; leading to miscommunication with health professionals and complex emotional responses. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Healthcare professionals might consider ways in which to support dysphagic patients' families later in their care pathway, through scheduling reviews or running dysphagia patient and family groups. Health and social care professionals and policymakers should learn from informal caregivers' expertise to promote better health and quality-of-life outcomes for the patient and caregiver. Equal, open conversations between health and social care professionals and patients/families on their understanding of dysphagia may help informal caregivers to better voice their concerns and support mutual understanding. This has implications for adherence to recommendations, psychological well-being and patient safety.

An International Commentary on Dysphagia and Dysphonia During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

COVID-19 has had an impact globally with millions infected, high mortality, significant economic ramifications, travel restrictions, national lockdowns, overloaded healthcare systems, effects on healthcare workers' health and well-being, and large amounts of funding diverted into rapid vaccine development and implementation. Patients with COVID-19, especially those who become severely ill, have frequently developed dysphagia and dysphonia. Health professionals working in the field have needed to learn about this new disease while managing these patients with enhanced personal protective equipment. Emerging research suggests differences in the clinical symptoms and journey to recovery for patients with COVID-19 in comparison to other intensive care populations. New insights from outpatient clinics also suggest distinct presentations of dysphagia and dysphonia in people after COVID-19 who were not hospitalized or severely ill. This international expert panel provides commentary on the impact of the pandemic on speech pathologists and our current understanding of dysphagia and dysphonia in patients with COVID-19, from acute illness to long-term recovery. This narrative review provides a unique, comprehensive critical appraisal of published peer-reviewed primary data as well as emerging previously unpublished, original primary data from across the globe, including clinical symptoms, trajectory, and prognosis. We conclude with our international expert opinion on what we have learnt and where we need to go next as this pandemic continues across the globe.

Dysphagia in Intensive Care Evaluation (DICE): An International Cross-Sectional Survey.

Dysphagia occurs commonly in the intensive care unit (ICU). Despite the clinical relevance, there is little worldwide research on prevention, assessment, evaluation, and/or treatment of dysphagia for ICU patients. We aimed to gain insight into this international knowledge gap. We conducted a multi-center, international online cross-sectional survey of adult ICUs. Local survey distribution champions were recruited through professional and personal networks. The survey was administered from November 2017 to June 2019 with three emails and a final telephone reminder. Responses were received from 746 ICUs (26 countries). In patients intubated > 48 h, 17% expected a > 50% chance that dysphagia would develop. This proportion increased to 43% in patients intubated > 7 days, and to 52% in tracheotomized patients. Speech-language pathologist (SLP) consultation was available in 66% of ICUs, only 4% reported a dedicated SLP. Although 66% considered a routine post-extubation dysphagia protocol important, most (67%) did not have a protocol. Few ICUs routinely assessed for dysphagia after 48 h of intubation (30%) or tracheostomy (41%). A large proportion (46%) used water swallow screening tests to determine aspiration, few (8%) used instrumental assessments (i.e., flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing). Swallowing exercises were used for dysphagia management by 30% of ICUs. There seems to be limited awareness among ICU practitioners that patients are at risk of dysphagia, particularly as ventilation persists, protocols, routine assessment, and instrumental assessments are generally not used. We recommend the development of a research agenda to increase the quality of evidence and ameliorate the implementation of evidence-based dysphagia protocols by dedicated SLPs.

Speech and language therapy service provision in spinal injury units compared to major trauma centres in England: Are services matched?

BACKGROUND: National UK guidance makes recommendations for speech and language therapy staffing levels in critical care and rehabilitation settings. Traumatic spinal cord injury patients often require admission primarily to critical care services within a major trauma centre prior to transfer to a specialist spinal injury unit but may not receive similar levels of care. Dysphagia and communication difficulties are recognised features of cervical spinal cord injury; however, little is known about access to speech and language therapy services to provide rehabilitation and improve outcomes. AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare the workforce and clinical practices of speech and language therapy services in eight spinal injury units and four major trauma centres in England through an online survey. METHODS & PROCEDURES: An online survey was created with 26 multiple-choice questions across seven sub-sections, with options for free-text comments. These were sent to a named speech and language therapy contact at each of the specified units. Responses were uploaded into Excel for analyses, which included descriptive statistics and analysis of themes. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: Responses were received from 92% (11/12) speech and language therapy services invited, which included seven out of eight spinal injury units and all four major trauma centres. No units met national staffing recommendations. Staff in spinal injury units provided an average of 27 h per week input to the unit compared to 80 h in a major trauma centre. Despite caseload variations, speech and language range of therapy involvement and prioritisation process were equivalent. Access to instrumental assessment varied, with less use of Fibreoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing in spinal injury units despite its clinical value to the spinal cord injury caseload. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: Speech and language therapy services delivering post-acute and long-term rehabilitation to spinal cord injury patients are limited by their resources and capacity, which restricts the level of therapy delivered to patients. This may have an impact on clinical outcomes for communication and swallowing impairments. Further evidence is needed of the interventions delivered by speech and language therapists and outcomes will be beneficial alongside benchmarking similar services. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject In England, people who sustain a spinal cord injury are admitted to a major trauma centre prior to transfer to a specialist spinal injury unit. Dysphagia and communication impairments are recognised as a complication of cervical spinal cord injury and benefit from speech and language therapy intervention. National recommendations exist for staffing levels, expertise and competencies for speech and language therapists working in critical care and rehabilitation units. What this study adds This study identified variations in the levels of speech and language therapy staffing, seniority, service delivery and access to instrumental assessments for dysphagia between major trauma centres and spinal injury units. None of the services complied with national staffing recommendations. Clinical implications of this study Speech and language therapy services in spinal injury units are often available part-time or have limited access to diagnostic tools which limits the range and intensity of rehabilitation input available. This has clinical implications for outcomes for swallowing and communication as well as long-term consequences for integrating back into community.

Development of a swallowing risk screening tool and best practice recommendations for the management of oropharyngeal dysphagia following acute cervical spinal cord injury: an international multi-professional Delphi consensus.

PURPOSE: International multi-professional expert consensus was sought to develop best practice recommendations for clinical management of patients following cervical spinal cord injury with oropharyngeal dysphagia and associated complications. Additionally, risk factors for dysphagia were identified to support the development of a screening tool. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A two-round Delphi study was undertaken with a 27-member panel of expert professionals in cervical spinal cord injury and complex dysphagia. They rated 85 statements across seven topic areas in round one, using a five-point Likert scale with a consensus set at 70%. Statements not achieving consensus were revised for the second round. Comparative group and individual feedback were provided at the end of each round. RESULTS: Consensus was achieved for 50 (59%) statements in round one and a further 12 (48%) statements in round two. Recommendations for best practice were agreed for management of swallowing, respiratory function, communication, nutrition and oral care. Twelve risk factors for dysphagia were identified for components of a screening tool. CONCLUSIONS: Best practice recommendations support wider clinical management to prevent complications and direct specialist care. Screening for risk factors allows early dysphagia identification with the potential to improve clinical outcomes. Further evaluation of the impact of these recommendations is needed.Implications for RehabilitationDysphagia is an added complication following cervical spinal cord injury (cSCI) affecting morbidity, mortality and quality of life.Early identification of dysphagia risk allows focused interventions that reduce associated nutritional and respiratory impairments.Best practice recommendations based on expert consensus provide a baseline of appropriate interventions, in the absence of empirical evidence.A multi-professional approach to rehabilitation encourages a consistent and coordinated approach to care across acute and rehabilitation settings.

Mixed methods evaluation of the impact of the COVID-19 ICU remote-learning rehabilitation course for frontline health professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK.

Background: Optimising outcomes for critically ill patients with COVID-19 patients requires early interdisciplinary rehabilitation. As admission numbers soared through the pandemic, the redeployed workforce needed rapid, effective training to deliver these rehabilitation interventions. Methods: The COVID-19 ICU Remote-Learning Rehab Course (CIRLC-rehab) is a one-day interdisciplinary course developed after the success of CIRLC-acute. The aim of CIRLC-rehab was to rapidly train healthcare professionals to deliver physical, nutritional and psychological rehabilitation strategies in the ICU/acute setting. The course used blended learning with interactive tutorials delivered by shielding critical care professionals. CIRLC-rehab was evaluated through a mixed-methods approach, including questionnaires, and follow-up semi-structured interviews to evaluate perceived impact on clinical practice. Quantitative data are reported as n (%) and means (SD). Inductive descriptive thematic analysis with methodological triangulation was used to analyse the qualitative data from the questionnaires and interviews. Results: 805 candidates completed CIRLC-rehab. 627 (78.8%) completed the post-course questionnaire. 95% (n = 596) found CIRLC-rehab extremely or very useful and 96.0% (n = 602) said they were very likely to recommend the course to colleagues. Overall confidence rose from 2.78/5 to 4.14/5. The course promoted holistic and humanised care, facilitated informal networks, promoted interdisciplinary working and equipped the candidates with practical rehabilitation strategies that they implemented into clinical practice. Conclusion: This pragmatic solution to educating redeployed staff during a pandemic increased candidates' confidence in the rehabilitation of critically ill patients. There was also evidence of modifications to clinical care utilising learning from the course that subjectively facilitated holistic and humanised rehabilitation, combined with the importance of recognising the humanity, of those working in ICU settings themselves. Whilst these data are self-reported, we believe that this work demonstrates the real-term benefits of remote, scalable and rapid educational delivery.

Speech and language therapists' management of ventilated patients and patients with tracheostomy in Israel.

BACKGROUND: There is increased involvement of speech and language therapists (SLTs) in critical care and long-term units supporting patients with ventilatory needs and complex dysphagia. SLTs have a range of specialist knowledge in the function of the pharynx and larynx to enable them to support therapeutic interventions and contribute to the management of those patients. In Israel, there are currently no designated courses or training programmes for SLTs to establish advanced clinical skills in tracheostomy and ventilator management. There are currently standards of care for SLT working in designated wards for ventilated patients, however not in acute wards, critical care, and internal medicine wards where ventilated patients can be hospitalized. AIMS: To identify the skills and expertise of the Israeli SLT workforce working with tracheostomy patients. Specifically, to identify their level of training, access to training, client population, work settings, and level of work confidence. METHODS: The study involved electronic distribution of a 55-item online survey to SLTs in Israel. The questions included demographic information, training, confidence, and clinical support. RESULTS: Responses were received from 47 SLTs. The majority (40.4%) spent between 1% and 9% of their clinical time with ventilated patients. Almost 80% work with seniors (≥65 years) and almost 70% work with adults (18-65 years) half the time or more. In inpatient rehabilitation, 46.8% reported that they manage patients with tracheostomy half the time or more. In outpatient rehabilitation settings, 21.3% reported that they manage patients with tracheostomy half the time or more. Prior to managing complex airway patients independently, 55.3% received less than 5 h formal tracheostomy training whilst 68.1% received less than 5 h training on ventilated patients. Multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) existed for tracheostomy patients (85.1%) and ventilated patients (70.2%) and high levels of confidence were reported for managing patients with tracheostomies (mode of 4 in a scale of 0-5, where 5 means fully confident) and ventilated patients (mode of 3 in a scale of 0-5). A significant relationship was found between level of confidence and presence of an MDT. CONCLUSIONS: Limited training access was found for SLTs working with this complex population. A competency framework needs to be established with access to training and supervision. MDT existence contributes to confidence. Most respondents worked in rehabilitation settings, and very few worked in acute care, critical care, and internal medicine wards. It seems reasonable that in order to change this, minimal standards of care should be established on these wards. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject Speech and language therapists (SLTs) have an important role in critical care and long-term units supporting patients with complex dysphagia and undergo formal training and supervision in UK and Australia. What this paper adds to existing knowledge In Israel, most SLTs work with tracheostomy and ventilated adult patients in rehabilitation settings, whilst few work in acute, critical care, and internal medicine wards. There are limited opportunities for formal training and supervision, although MDT support enhances clinical confidence. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? SLTs in Israel would benefit from establishing a competency framework for tracheostomy and ventilator patient management to support training, standards of care, and increase clinical involvement in acute settings. This will enhance clinical outcomes for their large population of complex airway patients.

A Consensus Statement for the Management and Rehabilitation of Communication and Swallowing Function in the ICU: A Global Response to COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To identify core practices for workforce management of communication and swallowing functions in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) positive patients within the intensive care unit (ICU). DESIGN: A modified Delphi methodology was used, with 3 electronic voting rounds. AGREE II and an adapted COVID-19 survey framework from physiotherapy were used to develop survey statements. Sixty-six statements pertaining to workforce planning and management of communication and swallowing function in the ICU were included. SETTING: Electronic modified Delphi process. PARTICIPANTS: Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) (N=35) from 6 continents representing 12 countries. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome was consensus agreement, defined a priori as ≥70% of participants with a mean Likert score ≥7.0 (11-point scale: 0=strongly disagree, 10=strongly agree). Prioritization rank order of statements in a fourth round was also conducted. RESULTS: SLPs with a median of 15 years of ICU experience, working primarily in clinical (54%), academic (29%), or managerial positions (17%), completed all voting rounds. After the third round, 64 statements (97%) met criteria. Rank ordering identified issues of high importance. CONCLUSIONS: A set of global consensus statements to facilitate planning and delivery of rehabilitative care for patients admitted to the ICU during the COVID-19 pandemic were agreed by an international expert SLP group. Statements focused on considerations for workforce preparation, resourcing and training, and the management of communication and swallowing functions. These statements support and provide direction for all members of the rehabilitation team to use for patients admitted to the ICU during a global pandemic.

The experiences of individuals with cervical spinal cord injury and their family during post-injury care in non-specialised and specialised units in UK.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with acute cervical spinal cord injury require specialised interventions to ensure optimal clinical outcomes especially for respiratory, swallowing and communication impairments. This study explores the experiences of post-injury care for individuals with cervical spinal cord injury and their family members during admissions in specialised and non-specialised units in the United Kingdom. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with individuals with a cervical spinal cord injury and their family member, focussing on the experience of care across units. Eight people with spinal cord injury levels from C2 to C6, were interviewed in their current care settings. Six participants had family members present to support them. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed with data inputted into NVivo for thematic analysis. RESULTS: The study identified six themes from the participant interviews that highlighted different experiences of care in non-specialised and specialised settings. A number of these were related to challenges with the system, whilst others were about the personal journey of recovery. The themes were titled as: adjustment, transitions, "the golden opportunity", "when you can't eat", communication, and "in the hands of the nurses and doctors". CONCLUSIONS: Whilst participants reported being well cared for in non-specialised units, they felt that they did not receive specialist care and this delayed their rehabilitation. Participants were dependent on healthcare professionals for information and care and at times lost hope for recovery. Staff in non-specialised units require training and guidance to help provide support for those with dysphagia and communication difficulties, as well as reassurance to patients and families whilst they wait for transfer to specialised units.

The role of speech and language therapists in the intensive care unit.

National guidance recommends the involvement of speech and language therapists in intensive care particularly for those requiring tracheostomy and ventilation. However, the role of speech and language therapists is poorly understood especially in the context of critical care. This article aims to increase awareness of the background training and skills development of speech and language therapists working in this context to demonstrate their range of specialist abilities. Speech and language therapists support and enhance the process of laryngeal weaning alongside the rehabilitation of speech and swallowing as part of the multidisciplinary team. Examples are provided of the types of interventions that are used and technological innovations that may enhance rehabilitation of oropharyngeal impairments.

Oropharyngeal dysphagia management in cervical spinal cord injury patients: an exploratory survey of variations to care across specialised and non-specialised units.

Study design: A multi-centre online survey to staff working in specialised and non-specialised acute units. Objectives: To identify clinical decisions and practices made for acute cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI) patients with respiratory impairments and oropharyngeal dysphagia. Settings: All hospital intensive care units in the UK that admit acute cervical spinal cord injury patients. Methods: Online distribution of a 35-question multiple-choice survey on the clinical management of ventilation, swallowing, nutrition, oral hygiene and communication for CSCI patients, to multi-disciplinary staff based in specialised and non-specialised intensive care units across UK. Results: Responses were received from 219 staff members based in 92 hospitals. Of the 77 units that admitted CSCI patients, 152 participants worked in non-specialised and 30 in specialised units. Non-specialised unit staff showed variations in clinical decisions for respiratory management compared to specialised units with limited use of vital capacity measures and graduated weaning programme, reliance on coughing to indicate aspiration, inconsistent manipulation of tracheostomy cuffs for speech and swallowing and limited use of instrumental assessments of swallowing. Those in specialised units employed a multi-discplinary approach to clinical management of nutritional needs. Conclusions: Variation in the clinical management of respiratory impairments and oropharyngeal dysphagia between specialised and non-specialised units have implications for patient outcomes and increase the risk of respiratory complications that impact mortality. The future development of clinical guidance is required to ensure best practice and consistent care across all units.