Instrumentos de rastreio para disfagia orofaríngea no acidente vascular encefálico

Multiprofessional screening protocol for dysphagia in patients with HIV infection: elaboration and content validity

PURPOSE

To elaborate and validate a multiprofessional protocol to identify the risk of dysphagia in people with HIV at the time of hospitalization.

METHODS

After bibliographic review, the dysphagia screening protocol created was submitted to the analysis of HIV/ Aids expert judges and target audience in the application of this instrument to perform content validity. These evaluators could suggest changes to the protocol, judging clarity, pertinence, and comprehensiveness. The CVI 0.78 was used to confirm the validity of the results.

RESULTS

The protocol was created including aspects related to oral and pharyngeal swallowing, and the final score was calculated based on the risks for clinical complications. The instrument presented CVI above 0.78 for all items in the two validation phases, as well as total CVI of 0.92.

CONCLUSION

Based on the obtained data, it was possible to create and validate the screening protocol from the point of view of appearance and content, once it presented total CVI above the minimum value stipulated in the validation of the expert judges and the target public, obtaining an adequate result for the protocol. Therefore, we can consider the resolution instrument, with the capacity to fulfill what was proposed.

Screening for aspiration risk associated with dysphagia in acute stroke

BACKGROUND

Stroke can affect people's ability to swallow, resulting in passage of some food and drink into the airway. This can cause choking, chest infection, malnutrition and dehydration, reduced rehabilitation, increased risk of anxiety and depression, longer hospital stay, increased likelihood of discharge to a care home, and increased risk of death. Early identification and management of disordered swallowing reduces risk of these difficulties.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective • To determine the diagnostic accuracy and the sensitivity and specificity of bedside screening tests for detecting risk of aspiration associated with dysphagia in people with acute stroke Secondary objectives • To assess the influence of the following sources of heterogeneity on the diagnostic accuracy of bedside screening tools for dysphagia - Patient demographics (e.g. age, gender) - Time post stroke that the study was conducted (from admission to 48 hours) to ensure only hyperacute and acute stroke swallow screening tools are identified - Definition of dysphagia used by the study - Level of training of nursing staff (both grade and training in the screening tool) - Low-quality studies identified from the methodological quality checklist - Type and threshold of index test - Type of reference test SEARCH METHODS: In June 2017 and December 2019, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database via the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination; the reference lists of included studies; and grey literature sources. We contacted experts in the field to identify any ongoing studies and those potentially missed by the search strategy.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that were single-gate or two-gate studies comparing a bedside screening tool administered by nurses or other healthcare professionals (HCPs) with expert or instrumental assessment for detection of aspiration associated with dysphagia in adults with acute stroke admitted to hospital.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened each study using the eligibility criteria and then extracted data, including the sensitivity and specificity of each index test against the reference test. A third review author was available at each stage to settle disagreements. The methodological quality of each study was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy (QUADAS-2) tool. We identified insufficient studies for each index test, so we performed no meta-analysis. Diagnostic accuracy data were presented as sensitivities and specificities for the index tests.

MAIN RESULTS

Overall, we included 25 studies in the review, four of which we included as narratives (with no accuracy statistics reported). The included studies involved 3953 participants and 37 screening tests. Of these, 24 screening tests used water only, six used water and other consistencies, and seven used other methods. For index tests using water only, sensitivity and specificity ranged from 46% to 100% and from 43% to 100%, respectively; for those using water and other consistencies, sensitivity and specificity ranged from 75% to 100% and from 69% to 90%, respectively; and for those using other methods, sensitivity and specificity ranged from 29% to 100% and from 39% to 86%, respectively. Twenty screening tests used expert assessment or the Mann Assessment of Swallowing Ability (MASA) as the reference, six used fibreoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES), and 11 used videofluoroscopy (VF). Fifteen screening tools had an outcome of aspiration risk, 20 screening tools had an outcome of dysphagia, and two narrative papers did not report the outcome. Twenty-one screening tests were carried out by nurses, and 16 were carried out by other HCPs (not including speech and language therapists (SLTs)). We assessed a total of six studies as low risk across all four QUADAS-2 risk of bias domains, and we rated 15 studies as low concern across all three applicability domains. No single study demonstrated 100% sensitivity and specificity with low risk of bias for all domains. The best performing combined water swallow and instrumental tool was the Bedside Aspiration test (n = 50), the best performing water plus other consistencies tool was the Gugging Swallowing Screen (GUSS; n = 30), and the best water only swallow screening tool was the Toronto Bedside Swallowing Screening Test (TOR-BSST; n = 24). All tools demonstrated combined highest sensitivity and specificity and low risk of bias for all domains. However, clinicians should be cautious in their interpretation of these findings, as these tests are based on single studies with small sample sizes, which limits the estimates of reliability of screening tests.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We were unable to identify a single swallow screening tool with high and precisely estimated sensitivity and specificity based on at least one trial with low risk of bias. However, we were able to offer recommendations for further high-quality studies that are needed to improve the accuracy and clinical utility of bedside screening tools.

Translation and transcultural adaptation of the Modified Swallowing Assessment (MSA) to Brazilian Portuguese

PURPOSE

To translate and adapt the Modified Swallowing Assessment (MSA) protocol for post-stroke patients into Brazilian Portuguese.

METHODS

This is an initial stage of the Brazilian Portuguese Modified Swallowing Assessment validation process. Translation was performed by two bilingual speech therapists and the translations synthesis evaluations by two external dysphagia experts. The synthesis version in the target language (Portuguese) was back-translated into the source language (English). After the synthesis of the translated versions, the instrument was applied to 22 post-stroke individuals.

RESULTS

Health professionals discussed all the results of the study stages considering the instrument concept and the target population. The semantic, linguistic and conceptual equivalences found in the translation and adaptation process were adequate, not requiring modifications since the items were consistent with the Brazilian culture.

CONCLUSION

MSA was translated and adapted to Brazilian Portuguese (MSA-BR). The translation and cross-cultural adaptation process included all the items of the original protocol and maintained the standards and characteristics of the instrument.

Translation and Validation of the TOR-BSST© into Brazilian Portuguese for Adults with Stroke

Brazil has a higher rate of dysphagia in stroke patients compared to developed countries, but does not have a fully validated method for early identification of dysphagia in this population. The aim of this study is to translate the TOR-BSST^© into Brazilian Portuguese and assess the newly translated version for reliability and validity with Brazilian adult patients with stroke. The translation of the TOR-BSST^© followed a multi-step process, according to the International Quality of Life Assessment project. For validation, we included patients with age ≥ 18 years and stroke diagnosis confirmed by neuroimaging and tolerance for videofluoroscopic swallowing assessment. The BR-PT_final TOR-BSST^© was administered by two trained screeners within two hours of videofluoroscopy. All assessors were independent and blinded. Estimates for reliability used the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and for accuracy both sensitivity (SN) and negative predictive (NP) values were used, along with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Sixty patients were enrolled and tested for a mean (SD) of 14.4 (6.9) days from last seen normal. Of all the patients, 41 (68.3%) failed the BR-PT_final TOR-BSST^© and 21 (35%) were scored to have dysphagia on videofluoroscopy, of which 11 (52.4%) had mild dysphagia. The overall reliability between screeners was satisfactory (ICC = 0.59; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.76). The SN and NP values for the BR-PT_final TOR-BSST^© were 85.7% (95% CI 0.62-0.96) and 84.2% (95% CI 0.72-0.95), respectively. The TOR-BSST^© was successfully translated to Brazilian Portuguese with the BR-PT_final TOR-BSST^© proven to have high sensitivity and negative predictive values when compared to gold standard videofluoroscopy.

Screening for aspiration risk associated with dysphagia in acute stroke

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Diagnostic test accuracy). The objectives are as follows:

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of bedside screening tools for detecting dysphagia, which is a predictor of aspiration, in people with acute stroke.

To assess the influence of the following potential sources of heterogeneity.

Patient demographics (e.g. age, gender, percentage of males in study, median age of study by gender). The time post‐stroke that the study was conducted (from admission to 48 hours) to ensure only hyperacute and acute stroke dysphagia screening tools are identified. Any significant change in the participant's condition between the index and reference tests being performed. The definition of dysphagia used by the study. Level of training of nursing staff, both grade and training in the screening tool. Low‐quality studies identified from the methodological quality checklist. Type of the index test and the threshold of the index test. Type of the reference test.