Tutorial on Clinical Practice for Use of the Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing Procedure With Pediatric Populations: Part 2.

PURPOSE: This is Part 2 of a two-part tutorial series establishing clinical guidelines pertaining to the administration of fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) developed by representatives of the American Board of Swallowing and Swallowing Disorders, all of whom are members of Special Interest Group 13. Whereas Part 1 focused on use of FEES with adults and included general information common to using FEES in any population, the purpose of this tutorial is to provide clinicians with updated best practice clinical guidelines for performing, interpreting, and documenting outcomes when using FEES with the pediatric population. This document has two main sections. The first section discusses the history of pediatric FEES, needed knowledge and skill pertaining to all elements of performing and interpreting the examination including detailed information related to indications and contraindications, developmental anatomical and physiological changes across childhood, preparing for and conducting the examination, medical collaboration, and patient safety. The second section provides detailed guidelines for clinicians who require training for use of FEES with the pediatric population. CONCLUSIONS: This first of its kind tutorial offers guidelines for clinicians who perform, interpret, and/or want to train to perform FEES in the pediatric population. Important clinical distinctions exist when using FEES with the pediatric population versus with the adult population. Developmental changes, pediatric medical frailty, provider-parent/caregiver interaction, collaboration with physician colleagues, and patient safety are representative of key areas highlighted in this document.

Simultaneous Videofluoroscopy and Endoscopy for Dysphagia Evaluation in Preterm Infants-A Pilot Study.

Introduction: The assessment of dysphagia in preterm infants has been limited to clinical bedside evaluation followed by videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS) in selected patients. Recently, fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) is being described more in literature for preterm infants. However, it is unclear if one test has a better diagnostic utility than the other in this population. Furthermore, it is also unclear if performing FEES and VFSS simultaneously will increase the sensitivity and specificity of detecting dysphagia compared to either test performed independently. Objectives: The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of performing VFSS and FEES simultaneously in preterm infants. Our secondary objective is to determine whether simultaneously performed VFSS-FEES improves the diagnostic ability in detecting dysphagia in preterm infants compared to either test done separately. Methods: In this pilot study, we describe the process involved in performing simultaneous VFSS-FEES in five preterm infants (postmenstrual age ≥36 weeks) with dysphagia. A total of 26 linked VFSS-FEES swallows were analyzed, where the same bolus during the same swallow was compared using simultaneous fluoroscopy and endoscopy. The sensitivity and specificity of detecting penetration and aspiration were evaluated in simultaneous VFSS-FEES compared with each test done independently. Results: Our results demonstrated that performing simultaneous VFSS-FEES is feasible in preterm infants with dysphagia. All patients tolerated the procedures well without any complications. Our pilot study in these five symptomatic preterm infants demonstrated a low incidence of aspiration but a high incidence of penetration. Simultaneous VFSS-FEES (26 linked swallows) improved the ability to detect penetration compared to each test done separately. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this study is the first to demonstrate the feasibility of performing VFSS and FEES simultaneously in symptomatic preterm infants with dysphagia resulting in potentially higher diagnostic yield than either procedure done separately.

Preterm infant feeding performance at term equivalent age differs from that of full-term infants.

OBJECTIVE: To identify differences in feeding skill performance among preterm infants at term equivalent age compared with full-term infants. STUDY DESIGN: Ninety-two infants (44 preterm infants born ≤32 weeks gestation at term equivalent age and 48 full-term infants within 4 days of birth) had a standardized oral feeding assessment. RESULT: Preterm infants at term equivalent age had lower Neonatal Eating Outcome Assessment scores (67.8 ± 13.6 compared with 82.2 ± 8.1; p < 0.001) and were more likely to have poor arousal (p = 0.04), poor tongue positioning (p = 0.04), suck-swallow-breathe discoordination (p < 0.001), inadequate sucking bursts (p = 0.01), tonal abnormalities (p < 0.001), discoordination of the jaw and tongue during sucking (p < 0.001), lack of positive engagement with the feeder and/or discomfort (p < 0.001), signs of aspiration (p < 0.001), difficulty regulating breathing (p < 0.001), and have an inability to maintain an appropriate state (p < 0.001), and complete the feeding (<0.001). CONCLUSION: A broad range of feeding-related difficulties appear to remain evident in preterm infants at term equivalent age.

Assessing Swallowing of the Breastfeeding NICU Infant Using Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing: A Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Premature infants may demonstrate feeding difficulties requiring an instrumental swallowing assessment. Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) is one assessment that can evaluate bottle feeding and breastfeeding. PURPOSE: This pilot study investigated the safety and feasibility of FEES for neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) infants during breastfeeding. METHODS: The setting for this prospective, descriptive study was an urban level III NICU that provided care for premature and critically ill infants. Participants were 5 infants recruited from a convenience sample who were at least 37 weeks postmenstrual age, demonstrated feeding difficulties during a bedside feeding and swallowing examination, and were breastfeeding. Each participant received a FEES assessment while breastfeeding (FEES-B). Adverse events and vital signs including prefeeding and postfeeding respiratory rate, heart rate, and oxygen saturation level were recorded to assess safety. Visualization of milk, laryngeal penetration, and tracheal aspiration assessed feasibility. RESULTS: Participants had a mean postmenstrual age of 39.8 weeks. No adverse events, including epistaxis or laryngospasm, were reported; there were no instances of autonomic instability; and there were no statistically significant differences between prefeeding and postfeeding respiratory rate, heart rate, or oxygen saturation level. Two infants successfully breastfed during FEES-B. Human milk was observable, and laryngeal penetration was noted with 1 infant. IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE: FEES-B was found to be safe, with limited data supporting feasibility. Infants demonstrated no physiologic instability during FEES-B, and milk was visualized in the pharynx during breastfeeding with 2 infants. IMPLICATION FOR RESEARCH: Further studies are warranted to assess effectiveness of FEES-B in infants.

Comparing videofluoroscopy and endoscopy to assess swallowing in bottle-fed young infants in the neonatal intensive care unit.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of videofluoroscopy (VFSS) and endoscopy (FEES) in detecting laryngeal penetration and tracheal aspiration in bottle-fed young infants in the NICU. STUDY DESIGN: VFSS and FEES findings of 22 infants were compared to each other and to a composite reference standard in this prospective study. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated for each assessment. RESULT: Agreement between VFSS and FEES was high (92%) for aspiration and moderate (56%) for penetration, with FEES detecting more instances of penetration. Compared to the composite reference standard, FEES had greater sensitivity and a higher negative predictive value for penetration than VFSS. Because of the low prevalence of aspiration, diagnostic accuracy could not be determined for aspiration for either assessment. CONCLUSION: FEES appears to be more accurate in detecting penetration in this population, and both assessments are valuable tools in a comprehensive feeding and swallowing evaluation.

Implementation and Analysis of a Free Water Protocol in Acute Trauma and Stroke Patients.

BACKGROUND: Free water protocols allow patients who aspirate thin liquids and meet eligibility criteria to have access to water or ice according to specific guidelines. Limited research is available concerning free water protocols in acute care settings. OBJECTIVES: To compare rates of positive clinical outcomes and negative clinical indicators of a free water protocol in the acute care setting and to continue monitoring participants discharged into the hospital system's rehabilitation setting. Positive clinical outcomes were diet upgrade, fewer days to diet upgrade, and fewer days in the study. Negative clinical indicators were pneumonia, intubation, and diet downgrade. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team developed and implemented a free water protocol. All eligible stroke and trauma patients (n = 104) treated over a 3-year period were randomly assigned to an experimental group with access to water and ice or a control group without such access. Trained study staff recorded data on positive outcomes and negative indicators; statistical analyses were conducted with blinding. RESULTS: No significant group differences in positive outcomes were found (all P values were > .40). Negative clinical indicators were too infrequent to allow for statistical comparison of the 2 groups. Statistical analyses could not be conducted on the small number (n = 15) of patients followed into rehabilitation, but no negative clinical indicators occurred in these patients. CONCLUSIONS: Larger-scale studies are needed to reach decisive conclusions on the positive outcomes and negative indicators of a free water protocol in the acute care setting.

Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing: A Multidisciplinary Alternative for Assessment of Infants With Dysphagia in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.

BACKGROUND: The standard procedure to assess an infant in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) who is suspected of aspirating on oral feedings is a videofluoroscopic swallowing study (VFSS). The VFSS has been used for more than 30 years to assess dysphagia and is considered the gold standard. However, there are challenges to the VFSS, including radiation exposure, transport to radiology, usage of barium, limited positioning options, and cost. An alternative approach is fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES), which uses a flexible endoscope passed transnasally into the pharynx to assess anatomy, movement/sensation of structures, swallow function, and response to therapeutic interventions. Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing has been established as a valid tool for evaluating dysphagia and utilized as an alternative or supplement to the VFSS in both adults and children. PURPOSE: This article provides an overview of the current challenges in the NICU with assessing aspiration and introduces a multidisciplinary FEES program for bottle and breastfeeding. METHODS/SEARCH STRATEGY: A review of the literature of dysphagia, VFSS, and FEES in the adult, pediatric, infant, and neonatal populations was performed. Clinical competency standards were researched and then implemented through an internal process of validation. Finally, a best practice protocol was designed as it relates to FEES in the NICU. FINDINGS/RESULTS: Fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing is a safe alternative to the VFSS. It can be utilized at the infant's bedside in a NICU for the diagnosis and treatment of swallowing disorders by allowing the clinician the ability to replicate a more accurate feeding experience, therefore, determining a safe feeding plan. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Competency and training are essential to establishing a multidisciplinary FEES program in the NICU. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Further research is needed to compare the efficacy and validity of FEES versus VFSS for infants in the NICU. Furthermore, evaluating the efficacy of FEES during breastfeeding is warranted.

How the health visitor can help when problems between parents add to postnatal stress.

BACKGROUND: Caring for a baby can provoke or intensify discord between parents, with adverse effects on their own well-being and their parenting. AIM: The aim of this study was to appraise evidence obtained from 450 mothers on the quality of the parents' relationship during the postnatal period and the value of support provided by health visitors in cases of discord. DESIGN: The health visitors were based at nine clinics in an outer London borough, and had been trained on a four-day course (the Brief Encounters course) to screen mothers for relationship problems at the 6-8-week check and to offer support (supportive listening, practical advice, referral) if problems were revealed. Data on relationship quality were obtained by a self-report screening scale completed at the 6-8-week check and again at the 12-week visit for immunizations, when the scale was included in a self-report questionnaire on help received from the health visitor. Intervention records kept by the health visitor showed what form any support had taken. Some 6 weeks later, 25 of the 82 mothers offered support, and their health visitors, were interviewed about their experience of the intervention. RESULTS: One in five mothers were identified as having a relationship problem at the 6-8-week check. Most were offered support. One in five of the 351 mothers who completed a questionnaire at the 12-week visit reported receiving support in improving their relationship. The follow-up interviews showed that most mothers valued this support. Responses to a questionnaire completed by health visitors showed that most were enthusiastic about its benefits. CONCLUSIONS: A four-day training course for health visitors enabled them to screen for relationship problems during the postnatal period and to provide support when required in a way that was valued by mothers. Most health visitors were enthusiastic about the value of the intervention in improving their contribution to family welfare.