Corrigendum: Contextualising clinical reasoning within the clinical swallow evaluation: A scoping review and expert consultation.

No abstract available.

Emerging professional practices focusing on reducing inequity in speech-language therapy and audiology: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: For the professions of audiology and speech-language therapy (A/SLT), there continues be a dire need for more equitable services. Therefore there is a need to develop emerging practices which have a specific focus on equity as a driving force in shifting practices. This scoping review aimed to synthesise the characteristics of emerging practices in A/SLT clinical practice in relation to equity with an emphasis on communication professions. METHODS: This scoping review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and aimed to map the emerging practices in A/SLT to identify the ways in which the professions are developing equitable practices. Papers were included if they addressed equity, focused on clinical practice and were situated within A/SLT literature. There were no time or language restrictions. The review included all sources of evidence across PubMed, Scopus, EbscoHost, The Cochrane Library and Dissertation Abstracts International, Education Resource Information Centre from their inception. The review uses PRISMA Extension for scoping reviews and PRISMA-Equity Extension reporting guidelines. RESULTS: The 20 included studies ranged from 1997-2020, spanning over 20 years. There were a variety of papers including empirical studies, commentaries, reviews and research. The results demonstrated that the professions were increasingly considering addressing equity through their practice. However, there was a prominent focus around culturally and linguistically diverse populations, with limited engagement around other intersections of marginalisation. The results also showed that while the majority of contributions to theorising equity are from the Global North with a small cluster from the Global South offering critical contributions considering social categories such as race and class. Collectively the contributions from the Global South remain a very small minority of the professional discourse which have a focus on equity. CONCLUSION: Over the last eight years, the A/SLT professions are increasingly developing emerging practices to advance equity by engaging with marginalised communities. However, the professions have a long way to go to achieve equitable practice. The decolonial lens acknowledges the impact and influence of colonisation and coloniality in shaping inequity. Using this lens, we argue for the need to consider communication as a key aspect of health necessary to achieve health equity.

The power struggle: exploring the reality of clinical reasoning.

PURPOSE: Historically, clinical reasoning has largely been considered from an empirical, biomedical standpoint. This epistemology, rooted in imperial rule, is influential in how healthcare practitioners practice. An empirical approach to healthcare often oversimplifies the complex nature of clinical reasoning by obscuring the influence of imperial ideologies on decision-making. This can perpetuate inequitable approaches to healthcare delivery which deepen social, political and economic divides globally. This paper aims to explore and challenge this standpoint by exploring how power, imperialism and performativity influences healthcare provision and decision-making amongst healthcare practitioners in dysphagia rehabilitation. METHODS: Qualitative exploratory interviews were undertaken with seven South African trained SLPs with experience working in dysphagia. To allow for participation and collaboration from participants, three data collection tools were employed within the interviews: oral histories, cognitive mapping and arts-based tasks. An initial modified thematic analysis followed by a further ideological analysis were undertaken to analyse the data collected. RESULTS: The results suggest that the participants felt influenced by several manifestations of power within healthcare. We argue that this demonstrates that imperial practices can influence knowledge, interaction and context and therefore affect how healthcare practitioners make decisions. CONCLUSION: By acknowledging the impact of imperialism and power dynamics on healthcare provision and clinical reasoning we can potentially begin to transform the epistemology from which we approach healthcare provision in favour of one which is better suited to the current realities of healthcare to allow for equitable service provision.

Contextualising clinical reasoning within the clinical swallow evaluation: A scoping review and expert consultation.

BACKGROUND: This study explored the available literature on the phenomenon of clinical reasoning and described its influence on the clinical swallow evaluation. By exploring the relationship between clinical reasoning and the clinical swallow evaluation, it is possible to modernise the approach to dysphagia assessment. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to contextualise the available literature on clinical reasoning and the CSE to low-middle income contexts through the use of a scoping review and expert consultation. METHOD: A scoping review was performed based on the PRISMA-ScR framework. The data was analysed using thematic analysis. Articles were considered if they discussed the clinical swallow evaluation and clinical reasoning, and were published in the last 49 years. RESULTS: Through rigorous electronic and manual searching, 12 articles were identified. This review made an argument for the value of clinical reasoning within the clinical swallow evaluation. The results of the study revealed three core themes related to the acquisition, variability and positive impact of clinical reasoning in the clinical swallow evaluation. CONCLUSION: The results of this review showed that the clinical swallow evaluation is a complex process with significant levels of variability usually linked to the impact of context. This demonstrates that in order to deliver effective and relevant services, despite challenging conditions, healthcare practitioners must depend on clinical reasoning to make appropriate modifications to the assessment process that considers these salient factors.