Communicating by electrolarynx with a blind tetraplegic spinal cord injury patient on mechanical ventilation in the ICU

Approach to the basic needs in patients on invasive ventilation using eye-tracking devices for non-verbal communication

PURPOSE

To analyze the feasibility of eye-tracking (ET) devices as a communicative approach to the basic needs (BN) of intensive care unit (ICU) and invasively ventilated nonverbal patients.

METHODS

Prospective, monocentric, and observational study including all patients without delirium, with an endotracheal tube or tracheostomy tube, with a history of invasive ventilation for more than 48 h, and inadequate nonverbal communication skills. The investigation was performed with commercially available ET devices (Tobii Dynavox I-15+) to express BN of ICU patients following a standardized 30-item yes-or-no questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 64 patients with a mean age of 58.6 years were included. The main diagnoses for ICU admission were major trauma (43.6%), sepsis (21.8%), and acute abdomen (15.6%). Pain during repositioning (69%), thirst (69%), sleep disorders (66%), fatigue (64%), and anxiety regarding the lifelong need for assistance (64%) were the main problems reported by the patients. However, most of the patients described expectations of health improvement (78%), good family support (66%), and an improvement in quality of life due to the use of ET devices (67%).

CONCLUSION

The use of ET in selected ICU patients with impaired communication is feasible, allowing them to express their BN. Apart from knowing the patients' individual BN, the results of our BN questionnaire may provide guidance for improvement measures in the care of patients in the ICU who are unable to speak. We believe that ET is useful for inquiring about and expressing BN and, therefore, may be capable of improving patient-medical team interactions and patient satisfaction.

Interventions to enable communication for adult patients requiring an artificial airway with or without mechanical ventilator support

BACKGROUND

Inability to communicate in a manner that can be understood causes extreme distress for people requiring an artificial airway and has implications for care quality and patient safety. Options for aided communication include non-vocal, speech-generating, and voice-enabling aids.

OBJECTIVES

To assess effectiveness of communication aids for people requiring an artificial airway (endotracheal or tracheostomy tube), defined as the proportion of people able to: use a non-vocal communication aid to communicate at least one symptom, need, or preference; or use a voice-enabling communication aid to phonate to produce at least one intelligible word. To assess time to communication/phonation; perceptions of communication; communication quality/success; quality of life; psychological distress; length of stay and costs; and adverse events.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library (Wiley version), MEDLINE (OvidSP), Embase (OvidSP), three other databases, and grey literature from inception to 30 July 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, cluster-RCTs, controlled non-randomised parallel group, and before-after studies evaluating communication aids used in adults with an artificial airway.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Two review authors independently performed data extraction and assessment of risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 studies (1931 participants) conducted in intensive care units (ICUs). Eight evaluated non-vocal communication aids and three voice-enabling aids. Usual care was the comparator for all. For six studies, this comprised no aid; usual care in the remaining five studies comprised use of various communication aids. Overall, our confidence in results regarding effectiveness of communication interventions was very low due to imprecision, measurement heterogeneity, inconsistency in results, and most studies at high or unclear risk of bias across multiple domains. No non-vocal aid studies reported our primary outcome. We are uncertain of the effects of early use of a voice-enabling aid compared to routine use on ability to phonate at least one intelligible word (risk ratio (RR) 3.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 50.08; 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). Compared to usual care without aids, we are uncertain about effects of a non-vocal aid (communication board) on patient satisfaction (standardised mean difference (SMD) 2.92, 95% CI 1.52 to 4.33; 4 studies; very low-certainty evidence). No studies of non-vocal aids reported quality of life. Low-certainty evidence from two studies suggests early use of a voice-enabling aid may have no effect on quality of life (MD 2.27, 95% CI -7.21 to 11.75). Conceptual differences in measures of psychological distress precluded data pooling; however, intervention arm participants reported less distress suggesting there might be benefit, but our certainty in the evidence is very low. Low-certainty evidence suggest voice-enabling aids have little or no effect on ICU length of stay; we were unable to determine effects of non-vocal aids. Three studies reported different adverse events (physical restraint use, bleeding following tracheostomy, and respiratory parameters indicating respiratory decompensation). Adverse event rates were similar between arms in all three studies. However, uncertainty remains as to any harm associated with communication aids.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Due to a lack of high-quality studies, imprecision, inconsistency of results, and measurement heterogeneity,  the evidence provides insufficient information to guide practice as to which communication aid is more appropriate and when to use them. Understanding effectiveness of communication aids would benefit from development of a core outcome measurement set.

Characteristics of Japanese Electrolaryngeal Speech Produced by Untrained Speakers: An Observational Study Involving Healthy Volunteers

Purpose The aim of this study was to investigate the characteristics of electrolaryngeal (EL) speech among untrained speakers to aid in its effective introduction and to identify syllables and words that are easy or difficult to pronounce. Method A total of 21 healthy individuals who had never used an EL were included. The participants were briefed, and tests comprising 100 Japanese syllables and 50 single words were conducted to evaluate EL speech intelligibility. A trained speaker was defined as a certified speech-language pathologist who underwent EL training for 3 months. A 5-point electrolarynx effectivity score (EES) was used for the subjective assessment of EL. Results The median (interquartile range) intelligibility scores of the untrained and trained groups were 24.0% (20.0%-34.0%) and 40.0% (36.0%-45.0%) for syllables and 48.0% (38.0%-60.0%) and 88.0% (82.0%-90.0%) for words, respectively. The intelligibility scores for syllables and words were higher in the trained group than those in the untrained group. Only two syllable subgroups (/m/ and /w/) had > 80% correct answers among untrained speakers. A total of 14 syllable subgroups (/k, kʲ, s, ɕ, t, t͡ɕ, ts, ɲ, h, ç, ɸ, p, pʲ, and a/), a number of which contained voiceless consonants, had < 40% correct answers among both speaker groups. A greater number of morae were associated with higher intelligibility scores. An EES of 4, indicating that the EL was effective, was the most frequent score. Conclusions It was difficult for untrained speakers to produce intelligible speech using an EL. Syllables, including voiceless consonants, were difficult to pronounce using an EL. Longer words with a greater number of morae were more intelligible, even for untrained EL speakers. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.16632622.

The Feasibility, Utility, and Safety of Communication Interventions With Mechanically Ventilated Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Systematic Review

Purpose The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the literature relating to the feasibility, utility, and safety of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) interventions and tracheostomy-related communication interventions with mechanically ventilated adult patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Method MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO databases were searched for relevant articles. Studies were included if (a) they were performed in the ICU, (b) they involved participants > 18 years of age, (c) > 85% of participants were mechanically ventilated, and (d) they reported on content that related to the feasibility and/or utility and/or safety of AAC intervention and/or tracheostomy-related communication intervention. Studies were extracted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The levels of evidence for included studies were assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines. Results Forty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Different communication interventions relating to intubated and tracheostomized mechanically ventilated patients were reviewed, including (a) communication boards, (b) electrolarynx, (c) high-technology AAC devices, (d) tracheostomy tubes with communication-enabling features, (e) one-way valve in line with the ventilator, (f) ventilator-adjusted leak speech, (g) ventilator adjustments and one-way valve, and (h) multiple interventions. Forty-seven of 48 studies examined the feasibility and utility of the interventions. Sixteen studies examined the safety of the interventions. The included studies were composed of randomized controlled trials (n = 2), quasi-experimental studies (n = 7), cohort studies (n = 8), case-control (n = 1), case series (n = 23), and case reports (n = 7). The levels of evidence varied and ranged from high (n = 2), moderate (n = 7), low (n = 9), and very low (n = 30). Conclusions There is developing evidence that communication interventions with mechanically ventilated ICU patients are feasible, have utility, and are safe. Further research is warranted to guide speech pathologist-directed intervention to improve patient outcomes and the patient experience in the ICU.

Feasibility of the electrolarynx for enabling communication in the chronically critically ill: The EECCHO study

PURPOSE

To assess feasibility of producing intelligible and comprehensible speech with an electrolarynx; measure anxiety, communication ease, and satisfaction before/after electrolarynx training; and identify barriers/facilitators.

METHODS

We included tracheostomized adults from 3 units following commands, reading English, and mouthing words. On enrolment, we measured anxiety, ease, and satisfaction with communication. We gave electrolarynx instruction for ≤5 days then 2 independent raters assessed intelligibility, sentence comprehensibility (9-point difficulty scale), and Electrolarynx Effectiveness Score (EES), and re-evaluated anxiety, communication ease, and satisfaction. Interviews explored barriers/facilitators.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We recruited 24 participants (Jan2015-Dec2016). Mean (SD) intelligibility was 45%(18%) words correct: 57%(21%) when facing. Mean comprehension difficulty was 6.4(2.0) overall, indicating moderate difficulty (5.5(2.5) scored visualizing). Mean EES was 2.9(1.0) (3 = improved lip-reading through recognizable sounds). Anxiety decreased from median 3.8 to 2.0 (P = .007). Communication was rated easier (median 15 vs 12, P = .04) whereas satisfaction remained similar (P = .06). Facilitators included device friendliness, patient independence, and word intelligibility. Barriers were patient weakness, difficulty positioning the device, and limited sentence as opposed to word intelligibility.

CONCLUSION

The electrolarynx may aid intelligible speech for some tracheostomized patients if the communication partner can visualize the users face, and reduce anxiety and make patient perceived communication easier.

Communicating with conscious and mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a systematic review

Background

Ventilator-dependent patients in the ICU often experience difficulties with one of the most basic human functions, namely communication, due to intubation. Although various assistive communication tools exist, these are infrequently used in ICU patients. We summarized the current evidence on communication methods with mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU. Secondly, we developed an algorithm for communication with these patients based on current evidence.

Methods

We performed a systematic review. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Cinahl, PsychInfo, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched to November 2015. Studies that reported a communication intervention with conscious nonverbal mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU aged 18 years or older were included. The methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool.

Results

The search yielded 9883 publications, of which 31 articles, representing 29 different studies, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The overall methodological quality varied from poor to moderate. We identified four communication intervention types: (1) communication boards were studied in three studies—they improved communication and increased patient satisfaction, but they can be time-consuming and limit the ability to produce novel utterances; (2) two types of specialized talking tracheostomy tubes were assessed in eight studies—audible voicing was achieved in the majority of patients (range 74–100 %), but more studies are needed to facilitate safe and effective use; (3) an electrolarynx improved communication in seven studies—its effectiveness was mainly demonstrated with tracheostomized patients; and (4) “high-tech” augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) devices in nine studies with diverse computerized AAC devices proved to be beneficial communication methods—two studies investigated multiple AAC interventions, and different control devices (e.g., touch-sensitive or eye/blink detection) can be used to ensure that physical limitations do not prevent use of the devices. We developed an algorithm for the assessment and selection of a communication intervention with nonverbal and conscious mechanically intubated patients in the ICU.

Conclusions

Although evidence is limited, results suggest that most communication methods may be effective in improving patient–healthcare professional communication with mechanically ventilated patients. A combination of methods is advised. We developed an algorithm to standardize the approach for selection of communication techniques.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-016-1483-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.