Approaches to Eating and Drinking with Acknowledged Risk: A Systematic Review

Healthcare Professionals' Perceptions of Stabilized Edible Foam with Adults with Severe Dysphagia; an exploratory study: Use of stabilized edible foam with adults with dysphagia: Use of stabilized edible foam with adults with dysphagia

BACKGROUND

Improving the quality of life for individuals with severe dysphagia is a priority when considering new areas of dysphagia management, especially if this increases opportunities to participate in social activities associated with eating and drinking. Edible foam is widely researched and available in the food industry; however, the use of edible foam within the field of dysphagia remains unexplored. Despite no research published on effectiveness and safety, a commercial product currently on the market is widely distributed across both Europe and the UK, including 28 NHS Trusts, suggesting that it is increasingly being used in clinical practice.

AIMS

To explore the perceptions and experiences of healthcare professionals on the use of stabilized edible foam (SEF) with adults with severe dysphagia in order to inform areas for future research in this novel dysphagia intervention.

METHODS & PROCEDURES

Healthcare professionals were recruited using purposeful sampling and snowballing technique. A total of 56 healthcare professionals were initially approached, of which 10 completed the semi-structured interviews. Interview questions were developed from a topic guide and a pilot questionnaire.

OUTCOMES & RESULTS

Thematic analysis was used to identify three themes: potential impact, consideration of risk and perceived experiences. Overarching each of these themes was the element of the unknown.

CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS

Use of SEF with adults with dysphagia is in its infancy. Whilst results indicate that some clinicians are embracing this novel approach, others express concerns. Therefore, further research is needed, particularly in relation of direct experience of individuals and contra-indications.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject The use of SEF with individuals with swallowing problems is a relatively novel area of dysphagia intervention in the UK. There are currently no published studies on its effectiveness and safety profile. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study provides valuable preliminary work into the area of SEF and adults with severe dysphagia, capturing the experience and perceptions of healthcare professions who have an awareness of SEF. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Increasing clinicians and researcher's awareness of this novel area of dysphagia management.

Readmissions to hospital following a decision to eat and drink with acknowledged risk

People with a dysphagia may eat and drink with acknowledged risks (EDAR). The FORWARD care bundle (Feeding via the Oral Route With Acknowledged Risk of Deterioration) is used at our hospital to support patients who are EDAR. This two-year retrospective study of patients supported by FORWARD aimed to determine incidence of EDAR-related readmissions and effects of discharge location and documented preferred place of care in advance care plans. Of 316 patients supported by FORWARD, 200 were discharged alive. 63% (n=126) were not readmitted within six months. Of 74 patients readmitted, 49% had an EDAR-related readmission. Significantly fewer patients wishing to remain at home had EDAR-related readmissions (7%, n=4) than those without a documented preferred place of care (23%, n=30, p<0.01), suggesting advance care plans are effective. Significantly more (23%, n=29) patients discharged to private homes had EDAR-related readmissions than those in nursing/care homes (10%, n=6, p<0.05), which could suggest residential care provides more support.

Health professionals' perceptions of complex feeding decision-making in school-aged children

AIM

Whilst prevalence of paediatric feeding disorders is high amongst children in specialist schools, there is little guidance for professionals supporting families with a child feeding orally with established risk of aspiration. We sought perceptions of the complex feeding decision-making process amongst health professionals supporting families in the specialist school setting in New Zealand.

METHODS

An observational, cross-sectional, national online survey of speech-language therapists was followed by in-depth interviews with seven health professionals associated with one specialist school.

RESULTS

Survey responses from 32 speech-language therapists showed inconsistency in assessment processes and how family, children and school staff are involved in feeding decisions, with 71% reporting a doctor had been involved. Respondents were not confident in their ability to predict aspiration risk, with 41% reporting that they could often determine risk, 41% sometimes and 16% never. Sixty-three percent of respondents indicated that level of risk was written in a report for a child and 50% reported that every child at high risk had a management plan. Speech-language therapists valued professional supervision, but it was not always available. Health professionals were broadly positive about the collaborative nature of decision-making in most but not all situations. They described communication, access/institutional and emotional barriers to timely, shared decision-making.

CONCLUSION

These findings demonstrate variability in how families are supported to make complex feeding decisions. Health professionals identified a need for clearer processes and strengthened communication between family, school and health professionals. Trusting relationships are critical if all families are to be well-supported.

Prognosis in dysphagic patients who are eating and drinking with acknowledged risk: results from the evaluation of the FORWARD project

BACKGROUND

patients with a permanently unsafe swallow may choose to eat and drink with acknowledged risk (EDAR). Informed decision-making and advance care planning depend on prognosis, but no data have yet been published on outcomes after EDAR decisions.

METHODS

the study was undertaken in 555 hospital inpatients' (mean [SD] age: 83 {12}) EDAR supported by the Feeding via the Oral Route with Acknowledged Risk of Deterioration care bundle between January 2015 and November 2019. Data were collected prospectively on clinical characteristics, dates of discharge, readmissions and death (where relevant). Kaplan-Meier survival functions and readmission risks per surviving patient per month were calculated.

RESULTS

mortality is 56% in the first 3 months after discharge but then mortality risk sharply decreases. The 3-month survival in EDAR patients was more likely in those <75 years of age, those with Parkinson's disease or a structural oral lesion as the dominating cause of dysphagia and those with mental capacity regarding EDAR decisions. Readmission risk in the 3 months post-discharge is 21% but reduces to 12% thereafter (P < 0.001). Thirty-eight percent of readmissions are secondary to EDAR-linked conditions such as chest infections and reduced oral intake.

CONCLUSION

there is a high mortality and readmission risk after an EDAR decision but much of this is frontloaded into the first 3 months, with a relatively favourable prognosis thereafter. This may be an appropriate time-point to reassess the plan for eating and drinking such that it continues to reflect the most appropriate balance of risk, comfort and nutrition.