PURPOSE: The objective of the present investigation was to test the feasibility and clinical utility of a real-time Internet-based protocol for remote, telefluoroscopic evaluation of oropharyngeal swallowing. METHOD: In this prospective cohort study, the authors evaluated 32 patients with a primary diagnosis of stroke or head/neck cancer. All patients participated in 2 separate fluoroscopic swallowing evaluations--one traditional on site and one telefluoroscopic off site--through the use of a telemedicine system. Agreement between sites was tested for 3 categories of variables: (a) overall severity of swallowing difficulty, (b) presence and extent of laryngeal penetration and aspiration as rated by the 8-point Penetration-Aspiration scale, and (c) treatment recommendations. RESULTS: Results showed overall good agreement in subjective severity ratings (κ = 0.636) and in Penetration-Aspiration scale ratings (mean absolute difference = 1.1 points) between the onsite and offsite clinicians. Agreement in treatment recommendations was moderate to high, ranging from 69.3% to 100%. CONCLUSIONS: The present study supports the feasibility and clinical utility of a telemedicine system for evaluating oropharyngeal swallowing. Given the difficulty and expertise needed to complete such evaluations, this study offers promising clinical avenues for patients in rural, remote, and underserved communities and countries where expert swallowing specialists are not available.
PURPOSE: The objective of the present investigation was to test the feasibility and clinical utility of a real-time Internet-based protocol for remote, telefluoroscopic evaluation of oropharyngeal swallowing. METHOD: In this prospective cohort study, the authors evaluated 32 patients with a primary diagnosis of stroke or head/neck cancer. All patients participated in 2 separate fluoroscopic swallowing evaluations--one traditional on site and one telefluoroscopic off site--through the use of a telemedicine system. Agreement between sites was tested for 3 categories of variables: (a) overall severity of swallowing difficulty, (b) presence and extent of laryngeal penetration and aspiration as rated by the 8-point Penetration-Aspiration scale, and (c) treatment recommendations. RESULTS: Results showed overall good agreement in subjective severity ratings (κ = 0.636) and in Penetration-Aspiration scale ratings (mean absolute difference = 1.1 points) between the onsite and offsite clinicians. Agreement in treatment recommendations was moderate to high, ranging from 69.3% to 100%. CONCLUSIONS: The present study supports the feasibility and clinical utility of a telemedicine system for evaluating oropharyngeal swallowing. Given the difficulty and expertise needed to complete such evaluations, this study offers promising clinical avenues for patients in rural, remote, and underserved communities and countries where expert swallowing specialists are not available.
Authors: Jacqueline A Hind; Gary Gensler; Diane K Brandt; Patricia J Miller Gardner; Loreen Blumenthal; Gary D Gramigna; Steven Kosek; Donna Lundy; Susan McGarvey-Toler; Susan Rockafellow; Paula A Sullivan; Marybell Villa; Gary D Gill; Anne S Lindblad; Jeri A Logemann; JoAnne Robbins Journal: Dysphagia Date: 2008-10-25 Impact factor: 3.438
Authors: Clare L Burns; Benjamin Keir; Elizabeth C Ward; Anne J Hill; Anna Farrell; Nick Phillips; Linda Porter Journal: Dysphagia Date: 2015-05-27 Impact factor: 3.438