skip to page content
Talk to the Veterans Crisis Line now
U.S. flag
An official website of the United States government

Health Systems Research

Go to the VA ORD website
Go to the QUERI website

HSR&D Citation Abstract

Search | Search by Center | Search by Source | Keywords in Title

Valid items for screening dysphagia risk in patients with stroke: a systematic review.

Daniels SK, Anderson JA, Willson PC. Valid items for screening dysphagia risk in patients with stroke: a systematic review. Stroke. 2012 Mar 1; 43(3):892-7.

Related HSR&D Project(s)

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.
   Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions



Abstract:

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Screening for dysphagia is essential to the implementation of preventive therapies for patients with stroke. A systematic review was undertaken to determine the evidence-based validity of dysphagia screening items using instrumental evaluation as the reference standard. METHODS: Four databases from 1985 through March 2011 were searched using the terms cerebrovascular disease, stroke deglutition disorders, and dysphagia. Eligibility criteria were: homogeneous stroke population, comparison to instrumental examination, clinical examination without equipment, outcome measures of dysphagia or aspiration, and validity of screening items reported or able to be calculated. Articles meeting inclusion criteria were evaluated for methodological rigor. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive capabilities were calculated for each item. RESULTS: Total source documents numbered 832; 86 were reviewed in full and 16 met inclusion criteria. Study quality was variable. Testing swallowing, generally with water, was the most commonly administered item across studies. Both swallowing and nonswallowing items were identified as predictive of aspiration. Neither swallowing protocols nor validity were consistent across studies. CONCLUSIONS: Numerous behaviors were found to be associated with aspiration. The best combination of nonswallowing and swallowing items as well as the best swallowing protocol remains unclear. Findings of this review will assist in development of valid clinical screening instruments.





Questions about the HSR website? Email the Web Team

Any health information on this website is strictly for informational purposes and is not intended as medical advice. It should not be used to diagnose or treat any condition.