Nurses' practices in stroke-related dysphagia in low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND:  Nurses are often required to perform dysphagia screening prior to oral intake by people following stroke. Previous studies report limited knowledge of nurses in identifying symptoms of post-stroke dysphagia. OBJECTIVE:  To explore existing literature regarding nurses' practices and knowledge in the identification and management of post-stroke oropharyngeal dysphagia (OPD) in low- and middle income countries (LMICs). METHOD:  A scoping review was conducted according to the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Studies were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, EBSCOhost (CINAHL and Health source: Nursing and Academic edition), Web of Science Core collection, and Cochrane libraries. No time frame was applied, and all included studies were screened according to predefined eligibility criteria. RESULTS:  Eight studies were included from 1 792 initial hits. Studies described nursing practices in acute care pertaining to identification and management of stroke-related dysphagia in LMICs. Increased knowledge was reported in nurses who had greater clinical experience in managing patients with dysphagia. Needs for training relating to dysphagia management and opportunities for interprofessional collaboration with speech-language therapists (SLTs) were identified. Contextual barriers specific to LMICs impacting on optimal nursing management of dysphagia included heavy workloads, staff-shortages and time constraints.Conclusion and contribution: Eight studies described nurses' practices and identified needs for the improvement of nurses' dysphagia care in LMICs. This scoping review highlighted the urgency for further research in dysphagia management that provides creative, contextually relevant solutions for improved protocols and training of health care professionals. Findings may be valuable for the multidisciplinary team involved in post-stroke dysphagia care.

Developmental Risks in Vulnerable Children from a Low-Income South African Community.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the developmental risks, and its influence, in young children from a low-income South African community. METHOD: An exploratory, cross-sectional research study design was employed. Developmental screening was conducted during home visits with 126 caregivers and children between 0 and 42 months of age from a low-income South African community. Children who failed the rescreen were referred for diagnostic assessment. A binomial logistic regression was used to determine the effect of developmental risks on developmental outcomes. RESULTS: Seventy-three percent of children screened were identified with a possible developmental delay (n = 59) according to caregiver-report using the PEDS tools. The regression model was statistically significant (χ2 (3) = 34.902, p < 0.001) with exposure to multiple languages (p < 0.05; odds ratio 3.810, CI 1.2-12.4) most indicative of potential developmental delay. Older children (19-42 months) were also more at risk of developmental delay (p < 0.001) than younger children (0-18 months). CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Healthcare professionals serving these vulnerable populations should create awareness amongst caregivers about the effect of developmental risks, in particularly multiple language exposure, on development.

mHealth developmental screening for preschool children in low-income communities.

Children are often only identified with a developmental delay when they enter primary school due to developmental delays hindering academic progress. Detection of at-risk children in low-income communities is typically unavailable due to several challenges. This study validated an mHealth-based developmental screening tool as a potential time- and cost-effective way of delivering services for preschool children. This cross-sectional within-subject study screened 276 preschool children from low-income communities using the mHealth Parents' Evaluation of Developmental Status (PEDS) tools. The mHealth PEDS tools' performance was then evaluated by comparing caregiver concerns according to the PEDS tools with results obtained using a reference standard assessment tool, the Vineland-3. The mHealth PEDS tools identified 237 (85.9%) of children at risk of developmental delay compared to 80.1% (n = 221) of children identified with a developmental delay using the Vineland-3. Sensitivity of the PEDS tools was high (92.6%) with low specificity (22.5%) using US standardised criteria. Literacy skills were found to be most delayed, according to the PEDS: DM (89.3%; n = 142) and Vineland-3 (87.1%; n = 134). Low specificity of the prescribed criteria may require the implementation of adapted referral criteria within low socio-economic status (SES) settings. The mHealth PEDS tools may still be valuable for preschool developmental surveillance of children within low SES settings. It is recommended, however, that children who are identified with a developmental concern undergo a second screen to reduce false positives.