Psychometric Properties of the MDADI-A Preliminary Study of Whether Less is Truly More?

A Hard Truth to Swallow: Critically Evaluating the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) as an Endpoint in Human Papillomavirus-associated Oropharyngeal Cancer Trials

The MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), a measure of swallowing-related quality of life, has become the preferred patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) in contemporary clinical trials evaluating the experience of human papillomavirus-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPVOPSCC) survivors. With many potentially practice-changing studies using the MDADI composite score as either a primary or coprimary endpoint, or as a key secondary endpoint, it is important to understand its psychometric properties as judged by contemporary PROM standards, with a particular focus on its application to contemporary HPVOPSCC populations. In this critical review, we evaluate contemporary HPVOPSCC studies reporting MDADI outcomes, followed by a detailed evaluation of the psychometric properties of the MDADI. Although the focus of this review was the MDADI, the issues discussed are not unique to the MDADI and have broader applicability to the evaluation and assessment of other PROMs currently in use. First, it may be possible to improve administration of the instrument, as related to missing items, scoring, and the number of items required. Second, although in many instances, the MDADI has been intended as a direct or surrogate measure of swallowing physiology, the MDADI composite score captures a broader health-related quality of life construct affected by both swallowing and eating, the latter of which may be affected by a range of nonswallowing treatment-related toxicities. Finally, a clinically meaningful change of 10 in the MDADI composite score, widely accepted and applied to the clinical trial setting, represents an undoubtably clinically relevant difference in unselected head and neck cancer survivors. However, the smallest difference that might be clinically important to a highly functional HPVOPSCC cohort remains uncertain. Understanding the purpose and properties of the MDADI instrument and furthering the sophistication with which we apply it in this population would improve its interpretation in clinical trials.

Patient-reported outcome measures for dysphagia in head and neck cancer: A systematic review and appraisal of content validity and internal structure

Dysphagia is a major head and neck cancer (HNC) issue. Dysphagia-related patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are critical for patient-centred assessment and intervention tailoring. This systematic review aimed to derive a comprehensive inventory of HNC dysphagia PROMs and appraise their content validity and internal structure. Six electronic databases were searched to February 2023 for studies detailing PROM content validity or internal structure. Eligible PROMs were those developed or validated for HNC, with ≥20% of items related to swallowing. Two independent raters screened citations and full-text articles. Critical appraisal followed COSMIN guidelines. Overall, 114 studies were included, yielding 39 PROMs (17 dysphagia-specific and 22 generic). Of included studies, 33 addressed PROM content validity and 78 internal structure. Of all PROMs, only the SOAL met COSMIN standards for both sufficient content validity and internal structure. Notably, the development of 18 PROMs predated the publication of COSMIN standards. In conclusion, this review identified 39 PROMs addressing dysphagia in HNC, of which only one met COSMIN quality criteria. Given that half of PROMs were developed prior to COSMIN guidelines, future application of current standards is needed to establish their psychometric quality.

Assessment of patients with head and neck cancer using the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory: Results of a study into its comprehensiveness, comprehensibility and relevance to clinical practice

BACKGROUND

The MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) is a widely used patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) which assesses dysphagia-related quality of life (QoL) in head and neck cancer (HNC). Despite its common use in HNC research and clinical practice, few of its psychometric properties have been reappraised since its inception. The aim of this study was to perform a survey-based qualitative analysis of UK HNC clinicians' perceptions of the content validity of the MDADI, evaluating it across the parameters of relevance, comprehensiveness and comprehensibility as per the COSMIN guideline for PROM assessment.

RESULTS

Four themes relating to the content validity of the MDADI were identified: (1) MDADI items lack clarity of definition of the terms 'swallowing', 'eating' and 'dysphagia'; (2) the MDADI is perceived to be overly negative in tone including items that service users may find distressing or disempowering; (3) items in the tool are exclusory to specific subgroups of patients, such as those who are nil by mouth or socially isolated; and (4) modifications to the MDADI were suggested and encouraged to make it more clinically useful and patient-centred.

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates that MDADI's content validity is 'insufficient' when rated by COSMIN parameters. This has significant implications for its continued use in HNC research and clinical practice. Further re-evaluation of the content validity of the MDADI is warranted, with potential future amendment of items being indicated if the results of this study are corroborated in subsequent research.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject The MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) patient-reported outcome measure of dysphagia-related quality of life is widely used in clinical practice and international clinical trials. Content validity is considered to be the most important property of a tool when assessing its psychometric strengths and weaknesses; however, the MDADI's content validity has not been reappraised since its initial development. What this paper adds to existing knowledge This study presents UK speech and language therapists' opinions and experience of the content validity of the MDADI and this first reappraisal of its content validity since its initial development highlights several issues with this psychometric parameter of the tool. This study highlights that further re-evaluation of the content validity of the MDADI is warranted, with potential future amendment of items being indicated if the results of this study are corroborated in subsequent research. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? Clinicians cannot assume that commonly used outcomes tools have strong psychometric profiles. Consideration of the content validity of outcomes tools during selection for use in clinical and research practice should be key, as this will encourage use of tools that produce relevant, valid data that can contribute meaningfully to patient-centred care.

Construct and discriminant validity testing of the FACE-Q Head and Neck Cancer Module for assessing speech and swallowing outcomes for patients undergoing maxillectomy or mandibulectomy

BACKGROUND

The FACE-Q H&N is a patient reported outcome measure covering multiple constructs for patients with head and neck tumors. Additional testing is needed to determine suitability in assessing speech- and swallowing-related quality of life and function.

METHODS

FACE-Q H&N, The M. D. Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), and Speech Handicap Index (SHI) scores were collected from two patient cohorts who had undergone jaw reconstruction. Construct validity was assessed using convergent validity testing and known groups testing to assess discriminant validity.

RESULTS

A priori hypotheses testing demonstrated strong correlations (ρ > 0.6, p < 0.05) between FACE-Q H&N eating and drinking, swallowing and eating distress scales with MDADI subscales, and between FACE-Q H&N speech function and distress scales and the SHI. Known groups testing demonstrated all instruments could delineate outcomes among patients who had radiation, advanced tumors, and tracheostomy.

CONCLUSION

The FACE-Q H&N may be an alternative for the SHI and MDADI in this patient cohort.

Addressing patients' concerns in speech and language therapy consultations following the diagnosis and treatment of head and neck cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Head and neck cancer (HNC) and its treatment impacts profoundly on patients' functional abilities, emotional well being and social interactions. Communication and swallowing are fundamental to everyday life, and the Speech and Language Therapist (SLT) has a critical role for both patients and their carers. In clinical practice, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are a key part of the armamentarium of the SLT. The purpose of the review is to summarize how these measures can be beneficial in the context of time pressured SLT outpatient consultations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Unmet needs in HNC are common and impact negatively on quality of life. There is an ever-increasing number of articles in this area, and it can be a challenge to identify, distil and summarize those specific to SLT.

SUMMARY

In this review, we discuss the scope of holistic evaluation, strengths and limitations of PROMs, the Patient Concerns Inventory-Head and Neck, barriers to the use of outcome measures, the carers perspective and surveillance. SLT are uniquely placed members of the multidisciplinary team and provide expert advice and intervention. The inclusion of PROMs in routine consultations provides a model of follow up, which helps address patients and carers complex and unmet needs, ultimately promoting better outcomes.

Dysphagia Advances in Head and Neck Cancer

Purpose of Review

This review summarises the current literature regarding head and neck cancer-associated dysphagia. Up-to-date evidence for dysphagia outcome measurement for this population is provided, in addition to recent innovations that aim to prevent, reduce or remediate the common and debilitating side effects of treatment.

Recent Findings

Both patient-reported outcomes and clinical measures are necessary to capture the multi-dimensional nature of swallowing. A minimally important difference in scores has been calculated for some of these measures, to aid interpretation and powering of clinical trials. The number of dysphagia-related trials has increased, predominantly investigating optimal treatment for oropharyngeal HPV-positive disease, and speech and language pathology interventions using an impairment-based approach.

Summary

Although substantial progress has been made, further work is necessary to establish a consensus over outcome measures. Modifying treatments may improve outcomes. Several trials are underway to establish the effectiveness of speech and language pathology dysphagia interventions.