Literature DB >> 28856436

Rethinking Residue: Determining the Perceptual Continuum of Residue on FEES to Enable Better Measurement.

Jessica M Pisegna1,2, Asako Kaneoka3, Rebecca Leonard4, Susan E Langmore5,6.   

Abstract

The goal of this work was to better understand perceptual judgments of pharyngeal residue on flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) and the influence of a visual analog scale (VAS) versus an ordinal scale on clinician ratings. The intent was to determine if perceptual judgments of residue were more accurately described by equal or unequal intervals. Thirty-three speech language pathologists rated pharyngeal residue from 75 FEES videos representing a wide range of residue severities for thin liquid, applesauce, and cracker boluses. Clinicians rated their impression of the overall residue amount in each video on a VAS and, in a different session, on a five-point ordinal scale. Residue ratings were made in two separate sessions separated by several weeks. Statistical correlations of the two rating methods were carried out and best-fit models were determined for each bolus type. A total of 2475 VAS ratings and 2473 ordinal ratings were collected. Residue ratings from both methods (VAS and ordinal) were strongly correlated for all bolus types. The best fit for the data was a quadratic model representing unequal intervals, which significantly improved the r 2 values for each bolus type (cracker r 2 = 0.98, applesauce r 2 = 0.99, thin liquid r 2 = 0.98, all p < 0.0001). Perceptual ratings of pharyngeal residue demonstrated a statistical relationship consistent with unequal intervals. The present findings support the use of a VAS to rate residue on FEES, allowing for greater precision as compared to traditional ordinal rating scales. Perceptual judgments of pharyngeal residue reflected unequal intervals, an important concept that should be considered in future rating scales.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Deglutition; FEES; Pharyngeal residue; Prothetic continuum; Ratings; Visual analog scale

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28856436      PMCID: PMC5792362          DOI: 10.1007/s00455-017-9838-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dysphagia        ISSN: 0179-051X            Impact factor:   3.438


  21 in total

1.  Assessing intrarater, interrater and test-retest reliability of continuous measurements.

Authors:  Valentin Rousson; Theo Gasser; Burkhardt Seifert
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2002-11-30       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Assessment of visual analog versus categorical scale for measurement of osteoarthritis pain.

Authors:  Mordechai Averbuch; Meyer Katzper
Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 3.126

3.  Individual differences in voice quality perception.

Authors:  J Kreiman; B R Gerratt; K Precoda; G S Berke
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1992-06

4.  Pooling score: an endoscopic model for evaluating severity of dysphagia.

Authors:  D Farneti
Journal:  Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 2.124

5.  Consensus auditory-perceptual evaluation of voice: development of a standardized clinical protocol.

Authors:  Gail B Kempster; Bruce R Gerratt; Katherine Verdolini Abbott; Julie Barkmeier-Kraemer; Robert E Hillman
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2008-10-16       Impact factor: 2.408

6.  The Yale Pharyngeal Residue Severity Rating Scale: An Anatomically Defined and Image-Based Tool.

Authors:  Paul D Neubauer; Alfred W Rademaker; Steven B Leder
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2015-06-07       Impact factor: 3.438

7.  Fibreoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing and videofluoroscopy: does examination type influence perception of pharyngeal residue severity?

Authors:  A M Kelly; P Leslie; T Beale; C Payten; M J Drinnan
Journal:  Clin Otolaryngol       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 2.597

8.  Comparing internal and external standards in voice quality judgments.

Authors:  B R Gerratt; J Kreiman; N Antonanzas-Barroso; G S Berke
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1993-02

9.  Psychophysical analysis of audiovisual judgments of speech naturalness of nonstutterers and stutterers.

Authors:  N Schiavetti; R R Martin; S K Haroldson; D E Metz
Journal:  J Speech Hear Res       Date:  1994-02

10.  Assessment of chronic pain. I. Aspects of the reliability and validity of the visual analogue scale.

Authors:  Anna Maria Carlsson
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1983-05       Impact factor: 6.961

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  History of Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing for Evaluation and Management of Pharyngeal Dysphagia: Changes over the Years.

Authors:  Susan E Langmore
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2017-01-18       Impact factor: 3.438

2.  Validation of the German Version of the Yale Pharyngeal Residue Severity Rating Scale.

Authors:  Marco Gerschke; Thomas Schöttker-Königer; Annette Förster; Jonka Friederike Netzebandt; Ulla Marie Beushausen
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2018-08-16       Impact factor: 3.438

3.  Reliability of Untrained and Experienced Raters on FEES: Rating Overall Residue is a Simple Task.

Authors:  Jessica M Pisegna; James C Borders; Asako Kaneoka; Wendy J Coster; Rebecca Leonard; Susan E Langmore
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2018-03-07       Impact factor: 3.438

4.  DIGEST Scale Predictis More Quality of Life Than PAS: The Residue Influence on Supracricoid Laryngectomy.

Authors:  Andressa Silva de Freitas; Guilherme Maia Zica; Mariana Salles; Ana Catarina Alves E Silva; Thiago Huaytalla Silva; Fernando Luiz Dias; Izabella Costa Santos
Journal:  Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2021-11-03

5.  Visual Analysis of Swallowing Efficiency and Safety (VASES): A Standardized Approach to Rating Pharyngeal Residue, Penetration, and Aspiration During FEES.

Authors:  James A Curtis; James C Borders; Sarah E Perry; Avery E Dakin; Zeina N Seikaly; Michelle S Troche
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2021-04-10       Impact factor: 3.438

6.  An Investigation of the Post-laryngectomy Swallow Using Videofluoroscopy and Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES).

Authors:  Margaret M Coffey; Neil Tolley; David Howard; Michael Drinnan; Mary Hickson
Journal:  Dysphagia       Date:  2018-01-19       Impact factor: 3.438

Review 7.  Phoniatricians and otorhinolaryngologists approaching oropharyngeal dysphagia: an update on FEES.

Authors:  Antonio Schindler; Laura W J Baijens; Ahmed Geneid; Nicole Pizzorni
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2021-11-15       Impact factor: 3.236

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.