| Literature DB >> 26911194 |
Rainer Dziewas1, Jörg Glahn2, Christine Helfer3, Guntram Ickenstein4, Jochen Keller5, Christian Ledl6, Beate Lindner-Pfleghar7, Darius G Nabavi8, Mario Prosiegel9, Axel Riecker10,11, Sriramya Lapa12, Sönke Stanschus13, Tobias Warnecke14, Otto Busse15.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neurogenic dysphagia is one of the most frequent and prognostically relevant neurological deficits in a variety of disorders, such as stroke, parkinsonism and advanced neuromuscular diseases. Flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) is now probably the most frequently used tool for objective dysphagia assessment in Germany. It allows evaluation of the efficacy and safety of swallowing, determination of appropriate feeding strategies and assessment of the efficacy of different swallowing manoeuvres. The literature furthermore indicates that FEES is a safe and well-tolerated procedure. In spite of the huge demand for qualified dysphagia diagnostics in neurology, a systematic FEES education has not yet been established.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26911194 PMCID: PMC4766659 DOI: 10.1186/s12909-016-0587-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Educ ISSN: 1472-6920 Impact factor: 2.463
Fig. 1Detailed overview of educational steps leading to the FEES certificate and FEES instructor certificate. aApplying for an authorisation to administer FEES-instructor examinations implies a minimum of 2 years of activity in this field, the verifiable performance of at least 500 FEES, the participation in the organization, and realisation of, at least one curricular FEES workshop, the training of at least five FEES-certificate holders and, optionally, a relevant scientific occupation
Contents of the basic workshop
| A) Basics |
| • History of FEES |
| • Aims of the evaluation |
| • Indications |
| • Contraindications |
| • Limits |
| • Examination procedure |
| • Distribution of tasks and responsibilities within the examination team |
| • Alternative instrumental dysphagia assessments and their indications |
| ○ Videofluoroscopic swallow study |
| ○ Pharyngeal and oesophageal manometry |
| B) Diseases |
| • Neurovascular diseases (e.g. ischaemic stroke) |
| • Neurodegenerative diseases (e.g. Parkinson’s disease, dementia) |
| • Neuromuscular diseases (e.g. ALS, polymyositis) |
| • Neurotraumatology (e.g. traumatic brain injury) |
| • Neuro-oncological diseases (e.g. gliomas, paraneoplastic diseases) |
| • Neuroinfectious diseases (e.g. brainstem encephalitis) |
| • Age-related changes in the swallowing mechanism (presbyphagia) |
| • Differential diagnosis of neurogenic dysphagia (e.g. cervical spine surgery, Morbus Forestier, disobliteration of the internal carotid artery, laryngeal reflux, Zenker’s diverticulum) |
| C) Equipment |
| • Flexible endoscope |
| ○ Fibre endoscope |
| ○ Video endoscope |
| • Light source |
| • Video camera |
| • Processing software |
| • Consumables |
| • Hygiene and cleansing |
| D) Preparations |
| • Patient information |
| • Patient positioning |
| • Local anaesthesia |
| • Nasal decongestant |
| • Defogging |
| • Emergency management |
| E) Endoscope handling and placement |
| • Holding and operating the endoscope |
| • Nasal passage |
| • Velum |
| • Oropharynx/hypopharynx and larynx |
| ○ Home position |
| ○ Close view |
| F) Standard FEES protocol |
| • Anatomic observation |
| ○ Stenosis of the nasal meatus |
| ○ Velopharyngeal incompetence |
| ○ Pharyngeal stenosis (post radiation) |
| ○ Post-operative findings |
| ○ Mucosal abnormalities |
| ○ Oedema |
| ○ Signs of gastro-oesophageal reflux |
| ○ Irregular position of gastric tube |
| ○ Saliva pooling |
| ○ Abnormal position of epiglottis, arytenoid cartilage and glottis |
| • Physiological examination |
| ○ Velopharyngeal closure |
| ○ Movement of the base of the tongue |
| ○ Epiglottis inversion |
| ○ Pharyngeal wall contraction |
| ○ Vocal cord and vestibular fold movement |
| ○ Sensory functions |
| • Evaluation of swallowing |
| ○ Choice of consistency depending on the problem at hand |
| ○ ‘White-out’ characterisation and post-swallow stage |
| ○ Identification of the salient findings |
| – Oral bolus control, leaking |
| – Delayed swallowing reflex |
| – Residues |
| – Penetration |
| – Aspiration |
| – Temporal characteristics of penetration and aspiration (predeglutitive, intradeglutitive or postdeglutitive) |
| – Adequacy of clearance effort |
| ○ Identification of the main pathomechanisms |
| • Evaluation of different therapeutic manoeuvres |
| • Evaluation and interpretation of the examination |
| ○ Classification |
| ○ Degrees of severity |
| ○ Therapeutic consequences (e.g. nutrition management, rehabilitation) |
| • Indications for referral to further medical departments (e.g. otolaryngology, enterology, phoniatrics) |
| G) Neurological examination protocols |
| • FEES protocol for stroke patients |
| • FEES tensilon test |
| • Fatigable swallowing test |
| • FEES L-dopa test |
| • Decannulation protocol |
Characteristics of complex patients
| Respiratory impairment | |
| Tracheostomy | |
| Restlessness (Parkinson’s disease, dystonia, delirium) | |
| Limited understanding of the situation (severe aphasia due to stroke or encephalitits) | |
| Fluctuating vigilance |
Fig. 2Examination components of the FEES certificate and FEES instructor certificate
Fig. 3Brief overview of the FEES certificate and FEES instructor certificate. TE, theoretical examination; PE, practical examination