Patient-reported outcome measures for dysphagia in head and neck cancer: A systematic review and appraisal of content validity and internal structure.

Dysphagia is a major head and neck cancer (HNC) issue. Dysphagia-related patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are critical for patient-centred assessment and intervention tailoring. This systematic review aimed to derive a comprehensive inventory of HNC dysphagia PROMs and appraise their content validity and internal structure. Six electronic databases were searched to February 2023 for studies detailing PROM content validity or internal structure. Eligible PROMs were those developed or validated for HNC, with ≥20% of items related to swallowing. Two independent raters screened citations and full-text articles. Critical appraisal followed COSMIN guidelines. Overall, 114 studies were included, yielding 39 PROMs (17 dysphagia-specific and 22 generic). Of included studies, 33 addressed PROM content validity and 78 internal structure. Of all PROMs, only the SOAL met COSMIN standards for both sufficient content validity and internal structure. Notably, the development of 18 PROMs predated the publication of COSMIN standards. In conclusion, this review identified 39 PROMs addressing dysphagia in HNC, of which only one met COSMIN quality criteria. Given that half of PROMs were developed prior to COSMIN guidelines, future application of current standards is needed to establish their psychometric quality.

A core outcome set for patient-reported dysphagia for use in head and neck cancer clinical trials: An international multistakeholder Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Measuring dysphagia-related patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) patients is challenging due to dysphagia's multidimensional impact, causing inconsistency in outcome reporting. To address this issue, this study derived a consensus-based core outcome set (COS) for patient-reported dysphagia in HNC clinical trials where swallowing is a primary or secondary endpoint. METHODS: A sample of HNC clinicians, researchers, patients, and caregivers participated in a 2-Round Delphi technique. A Delphi survey, containing a comprehensive list of dysphagia-related PROs, was developed. In Round 1, participants rated item importance on a 5-point scale. Items rated ≥4 by >70% advanced to Round 2, where a consensus meeting addressed items with varied opinions, and the Delphi survey with remaining items was completed. Items rated ≥4 by >70% formed the final COS. RESULTS: Forty-five participants from nine countries were recruited. After Round 1, 40 items were excluded and 64 advanced to Round 2. After Round 2, a 7-outcome COS was established, comprising the domains of dysphagia symptoms, health status and quality of life. CONCLUSION: This study achieved consensus among HNC stakeholders on essential dysphagia PROs for HNC clinical trials. It is advisable to include these 7-core concepts in clinical trials involving people with HNC to facilitate treatment comparisons and data synthesis.

The Acceptability of Behavioural Swallowing Interventions for Head and Neck Cancer Patients During Radiotherapy: A Qualitative Study Exploring Experiences of Clinical Trial Speech-Language Pathologists.

The PRO-ACTIVE randomized clinical trial offers 3 swallowing therapies to Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) patients during radiotherapy (RT) namely: reactive, proactive low- ("EAT-RT" only) and high-intensity ("EAT-RT + exercises"). Understanding the experiences of the trial Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs) will be useful to inform clinical implementation. This study assessed SLP opinions of acceptability and clinical feasibility of the 3 trial therapies. 8 SLPs from 3 Canadian PRO-ACTIVE trial sites participated in individual interviews. Using a qualitative approach, data collection and thematic analysis were guided by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability. Member checking was conducted through a follow-up focus group with willing participants. Seven themes were derived: intervention coherence, burden, barriers/facilitators, self-efficacy, attitude, ethicality, and perceived effectiveness. SLPs felt all 3 therapies had potential benefit yet perceived more advantages of proactive therapies compared to reactive. Compared to exercises, SLPs particularly endorsed the EAT-RT component. A major barrier was keeping patients motivated, which was impacted by acute toxicity and sometimes conflicting instructions from the healthcare team. Strategies utilized by to overcome barriers included: scaling exercises and/or diet up/down according to the changing patient needs and communicating therapy goals with healthcare team. A model was derived describing the perceived acceptability of the swallowing therapies according to SLPs, based on the interconnection of main themes. Proactive therapies were perceived as more acceptable to trial SLPs, for facilitating patient engagement. The perceived acceptability of the swallowing therapies was related to seven interconnected aspects of providers' experience. These findings will inform the implementation and potential uptake of the PRO-ACTIVE swallowing therapies in clinical practice.

Exploring the Acceptability of Behavioral Swallowing Interventions for Head and Neck Cancer Patients During Radiotherapy: A Qualitative Study of Patients' Experience.

The PRO-ACTIVE randomized clinical trial offers 3 swallowing therapies to Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) patients during radiotherapy namely: reactive, proactive low- ("EAT-RT" only), and high-intensity ("EAT-RT + exercises"). Understanding the perceived acceptability of these interventions is important to inform eventual implementation into clinical practice. This study explored patients' perspectives using qualitative methodology. At 2 Canadian PRO-ACTIVE trial sites, 24 trial participants were recruited for individual semi-structured interviews, representing each of the 3 trial arms. Data collection and thematic analysis were guided by the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA). Member checking was conducted through follow-up focus groups. Seven themes were derived reflecting the TFA constructs. Overall, regardless of trial arm, patients reported a positive experience with therapy. Patients identified benefits of EAT-RT therapy, reporting that it provided meaningful feedback on diet progress and supported goal setting for oral intake. Patients who received proactive therapies valued the opportunity to set expectations early, build mealtime routine iteratively over time, and have an extended engagement with the SLP. Regardless of trial arm, patients agreed proactive therapy aligned with what they think is best and that therapy intensity should accommodate individual needs. This study identified the value to HNC patients of receiving swallowing interventions during RT and setting realistic expectations around swallowing. Compared to reactive care, proactive therapies were perceived helpful in consolidating habits early, establishing realistic expectations around swallowing and building an extended rapport with the SLP. These findings will inform the implementation of proactive versus reactive swallowing therapies in clinical practice.

Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures for dysphagia in head and neck cancer: a systematic review protocol using COSMIN methodology.

BACKGROUND: Dysphagia (swallowing difficulty) is one of the most common and debilitating sequelae of head and neck cancer (HNC). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are a fundamental component of dysphagia outcomes evaluation, as they inform treatment consequences that cannot be captured by objective clinician measures. Many PROMs for dysphagia in HNC are available, but their validity is unclear. As a consequence, the selection of the most appropriate PROM for dysphagia in HNC is complex and often based on the clinician's personal preferences, rather than on valid psychometric properties. This protocol describes a systematic review aiming at (1) identifying PROMs specific to dysphagia symptoms, swallowing functional status, swallowing-related health status, and swallowing-related quality of life in HNC, (2) mapping them to our conceptual framework of dysphagia-related PROs, and (3) appraising their psychometric properties using the Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instrument (COSMIN) methodology. METHODS: Six electronic databases will be searched from inception to December 2020 for all primary studies in any language and design detailing PROM development, reliability, validity, feasibility, interpretability, and/or cross-cultural adaptation. Eligibility criteria will target PROMs for patients with HNC (≥ 90% of the study sample) with ≥ 20% of their items pertaining to swallowing. Two independent raters will screen abstract and full texts and a third rater will resolve discrepancies. Data will be extracted on study, sample and PROM characteristics, and results of psychometric testing. PROMs will be mapped to our conceptual framework. The methodological quality of included PROMs and their psychometric properties will be appraised using the COSMIN risk of bias checklist and evidence will be summarized using a modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. DISCUSSION: This systematic review will provide a summary of existing dysphagia-related PROMs for people with HNC and a comprehensive account of their psychometric properties. We will provide recommendations on PROMs selection which will aid healthcare professionals to the most appropriate PROM based on its validity, reliability, feasibility, interpretability and suitability for clinical and research settings. Further recommendations will be made on areas of measurement property requiring further testing. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42021237877.

European white paper: oropharyngeal dysphagia in head and neck cancer.

PURPOSE: To develop a European White Paper document on oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) in head and neck cancer (HNC). There are wide variations in the management of OD associated with HNC across Europe. METHODS: Experts in the management of specific aspects of OD in HNC across Europe were delegated by their professional medical and multidisciplinary societies to contribute to this document. Evidence is based on systematic reviews, consensus-based position statements, and expert opinion. RESULTS: Twenty-four sections on HNC-specific OD topics. CONCLUSION: This European White Paper summarizes current best practice on management of OD in HNC, providing recommendations to support patients and health professionals. The body of literature and its level of evidence on diagnostics and treatment for OD in HNC remain poor. This is in the context of an expected increase in the prevalence of OD due to HNC in the near future. Contributing factors to increased prevalence include aging of our European population (including HNC patients) and an increase in human papillomavirus (HPV) related cancer, despite the introduction of HPV vaccination in various countries. We recommend timely implementation of OD screening in HNC patients while emphasizing the need for robust scientific research on the treatment of OD in HNC. Meanwhile, its management remains a challenge for European professional associations and policymakers.

Interventions for Feeding and Swallowing Disorders in Adults with Intellectual Disability: A Systematic Review of the Evidence.

Feeding and swallowing disorders are prevalent in adults with Intellectual Disability (ID) and can potentially lead to discomfort, malnutrition, dehydration, aspiration, and choking. Most common interventions include: diet modification, compensatory strategies, swallowing therapy, and non-oral feeding. Despite their common use, the research evidence for these interventions is lacking. The current study aimed to systematically review the evidence for the safety and the effectiveness of interventions for feeding and swallowing disorders in adults with ID. Seven electronic databases, conference proceedings, and reference lists of relevant studies were reviewed from online availability to March 2019, with no language restrictions. Eligibility criteria encompassed experimental or non-experimental study design, adults (> 18 years) with ID and feeding and/or swallowing disorders (any etiology and severity) and any intervention for feeding and/or swallowing disorders. Methodological quality was assessed by two independent reviewers using the Downs and Black checklist. Four articles met the inclusion criteria. All included studies considered enteral feeding as an intervention strategy and had a retrospective observational design. Overall, included studies reported positive change in nutritional status and a high incidence of adverse events following enteral feeding initiation. Risk of bias was high with variability in methodological quality. The safety and effectiveness of interventions for feeding and swallowing in adults with ID is unclear. This review highlights the lack of evidence-based practice in this area. Directions for further research are provided. Before enteral feeding initiation, risks and benefits should be appropriately balanced on an individual basis, and caregivers should be involved in the decision-making process.

Communication difficulties in adults with Intellectual Disability: Results from a national cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: People with an intellectual disability (ID) are vulnerable to communication impairments, with consequences for employment, education, and social participation. AIMS: To identify the communication skills of a population of adults (40+ years) with ID and explore relationships between individual and environmental factors and communication skills. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Data from a sample of 601 adults with ID was selected from the Intellectual Disability Supplement to The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (IDS-TILDA) addressing communication characteristics, demographics, co-morbidities, challenging behaviours, and social participation. A multiple regression model and a decision-making tree were built to identify factors related to communication abilities. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: Overall, 57.9 % of participants experienced communication difficulties, with 23.5 % reporting severe difficulties. Only 75.1 % of participants communicated verbally; more than half found communicating with professionals and non-familiar partners difficult. Level of ID, low social participation, challenging behaviours, and diagnosis of Down syndrome were significantly associated with communication difficulties. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Communication difficulties are prevalent in adults with ID and are influenced by complex factors. Interventions to enhance interaction and quality of life of individuals with ID should consider communication opportunities, needs, and barriers.