Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Apr;37(2):333-349.
doi: 10.1007/s00455-021-10283-7. Epub 2021 Mar 31.

White Paper by the European Society for Swallowing Disorders: Screening and Non-instrumental Assessment for Dysphagia in Adults

Renée Speyer  1   2   3 , Reinie Cordier  4   5 , Daniele Farneti  6 , Weslania Nascimento  7 , Walmari Pilz  8   9 , Eric Verin  10 , Margaret Walshe  11 , Virginie Woisard  12   13
Affiliations
Review

White Paper by the European Society for Swallowing Disorders: Screening and Non-instrumental Assessment for Dysphagia in Adults

Renée Speyer et al. Dysphagia. 2022 Apr.

Abstract

This White Paper by the European Society for Swallowing Disorders (ESSD) reports on the current state of screening and non-instrumental assessment for dysphagia in adults. An overview is provided on the measures that are available, and how to select screening tools and assessments. Emphasis is placed on different types of screening, patient-reported measures, assessment of anatomy and physiology of the swallowing act, and clinical swallowing evaluation. Many screening and non-instrumental assessments are available for evaluating dysphagia in adults; however, their use may not be warranted due to poor diagnostic performance or lacking robust psychometric properties. This white paper provides recommendations on how to select best evidence-based screening tools and non-instrumental assessments for use in clinical practice targeting different constructs, target populations and respondents, based on criteria for diagnostic performance, psychometric properties (reliability, validity, and responsiveness), and feasibility. In addition, gaps in research that need to be addressed in future studies are discussed. The following recommendations are made: (1) discontinue the use of non-validated dysphagia screening tools and assessments; (2) implement screening using tools that have optimal diagnostic performance in selected populations that are at risk of dysphagia, such as stroke patients, frail older persons, patients with progressive neurological diseases, persons with cerebral palsy, and patients with head and neck cancer; (3) implement measures that demonstrate robust psychometric properties; and (4) provide quality training in dysphagia screening and assessment to all clinicians involved in the care and management of persons with dysphagia.

Keywords: Diagnostic accuracy; Measures; Psychometrics; Reliability; Responsiveness; Validity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart for selection of screening tools and clinical assessments
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Shaker R. Oropharyngeal dysphagia. Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2006;2(9):633–634. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Roden DF, Altman KW. Causes of dysphagia among different age groups. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2013;46(6):965–987. - PubMed
    1. Martino R, et al. Dysphagia after stroke. Stroke. 2005;36(12):2756–2763. - PubMed
    1. Vergis EN, et al. Pneumonia in long-term care: a prospective case-control study of risk factors and impact on survival. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:2378–2381. - PubMed
    1. Jean A. Brain stem control of swallowing: neuronal network and cellular mechanisms. Physiol Rev. 2001;81(2):929–969. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources