Misconnexion of a cuffed 'speaking' tracheostomy tube. A report of the consequences, and recommendations for future use of similar tracheostomy tubes

Determining the Prevalence, Implementation Approaches, and Opinions of Above Cuff Vocalization: A Survey of Health Care Professionals

OBJECTIVE

To conduct an international survey to investigate the use of above cuff vocalization (ACV) and how practice and opinion differs.

DESIGN

Observational, cross-sectional online survey.

SETTING

Critical care, acute, rehabilitation, long-term care, and community.

PARTICIPANTS

Health care professionals involved in tracheostomy care or weaning (N=243).

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Tracheostomy management, prevalence, personal experiences and opinions, and barriers to use. Quantitative data were reported descriptively, and content analysis was conducted with qualitative data.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 243 health care professionals from 9 professional groups and 25 countries, with most responses from the United Kingdom (54%) and speech and language therapists (55%). ACV was used in 39% of services (n=93). Sixty percent (n=50/83) of health care professionals with direct experience of ACV had used it with <10 people. Implementation of ACV varied widely concerning procedures, contraindications, safety processes, professionals involved, competencies, staff training, delivery, and outcome measures. The top benefits were communication (n=76/93; 82%), mood (n=62/93; 67%), and laryngeal sensation (n=49/93; 53%). Complications included discomfort (n=54/93; 58%) and strained vocal quality (n=39/93; 42%). Barriers to ACV implementation included lack of knowledgeable staff (n=92/238; 39%) and lack of access to training (n=73/238; 31%).

CONCLUSIONS

ACV uptake varies internationally with no standardized approach to ACV delivery. Diversity of opinions on approaches and benefits exist. Serious complications are infrequent, but minor complications are common. Future research is needed to establish optimal ACV implementation to maximize benefits and minimize risks.

Evidence for Above Cuff Vocalization in Patients With a Tracheostomy: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

To determine how above cuff vocalization (ACV) is implemented in clinical practice, to identify what evidence exists on the effectiveness and safety of ACV, and to evaluate the acceptability of ACV.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in eight databases (MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science) in May 2019 and updated in June 2020. Two reviewers independently screened, selected, and extracted data. Study quality was appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tools and a narrative synthesis was conducted. Systematic review registration number: CRD42019133942.

RESULTS

The searches identified 1327 records. The 13 eligible studies included four case studies, three case series, four observational studies without a control group, one quasi-experimental study, and one randomized controlled trial. Study quality was low, with most studies having high risk of bias. There was a high level of heterogeneity in study design and outcome measures used. Detailed information on ACV application and dose-delivered was lacking in 12 studies. Positive effects were reported for communication (n = 7), swallowing (n = 4), cough response (n = 2), and quality-of-life (n = 2), but with inconsistent use of objective outcome measures. There is limited quantitative or qualitative evidence for acceptability. Adverse events and complications were reported in nine studies, and four highlighted the importance of involving an experienced speech and language therapist.

CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence for the acceptability, effectiveness, safety, or optimal implementation of ACV. The evidence is insufficient to provide recommendations regarding optimal intervention delivery. Future research should ensure detailed recording of ACV delivery and utilize a core outcome set. Laryngoscope, 2021.

Above cuff vocalisation (ACV): A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Patients in intensive care frequently suffer from not being able to communicate verbally. The aim of this scoping review was to study the safety and effectiveness of the above cuff vocalisation (ACV) on speech and quality of life (QOL) in patients dependent on a cuffed tracheostomy.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted. The databases Ovid Medline, Cochrane Library, and Embase were systematically searched in May 2020. We included clinical studies with patients exposed to ACV where speech, QOL or safety issues were assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 17 studies were included, of which 15 were observational and 2 were randomised controlled trials. Totally, 231 patients were included. ACV enabled most of the included patients (115/131; 88%) to speak with an audible voice or whisper (moderate quality of evidence). Voice related QOL (V-RQOL) and QOL in mechanically ventilated patients (QOL-MV) improved from pre- to post- ACV compared to a control group not tolerating a one-way speaking valve (P = .01 and P = .04, respectively) (very low quality of evidence). Several minor complications or problems were reported in 20/75 (27%) cases in addition to two serious adverse events: subcutaneous emphysema in one patient where the tracheostomy was dislodged and a distended trachea in another due to the misconnection of continuous gas to the cuff (low/ very low quality of evidence).

CONCLUSION

ACV facilitated communication in patients dependent on a cuffed tracheostomy and attempting to communicate. Quality of evidence in improved V-RQOL and QOL-MV was very low. Several minor complications and two serious adverse events were reported.

Speaking Tracheostomy Tube and Modified Mouthstick Stylus in a Ventilator-Dependent Patient with Spinal Cord Injury

Communication is a serious problem for patients with ventilator-dependent tetraplegia. A 73-year-old man was presented at the emergency room in cardiopulmonary arrest after falling from a height of 2 m. After successful resuscitation, fractures of the cervical spine and cervical spinal cord injury were found. Due to paralysis of the respiratory muscles, a mechanical ventilator with a tracheostomy tube was required. First, a cuffed tracheostomy tube and a speaking tracheostomy tube were inserted, and humidified oxygen was introduced via the suction line. Using these tubes, the patient could produce speech sounds, but use was limited to 10 min due to discomfort. Second, a mouthstick stylus, fixed on a mouthpiece that fits over the maxillary teeth, was used. The patient used both a communication board and a touch screen device with this mouthstick stylus. The speaking tracheostomy tube and mouthstick stylus greatly improved his ability to communicate.