Effects of Therapy in Oropharyngeal Dysphagia by Speech and Language Therapists: A Systematic Review

Medical and paramedical treatments should be evaluated according to current standards of evidence-based medicine. Evaluation of therapy in oropharyngeal dysphagia fits into this growing interest. A systematic review is given of the literature on the effects of therapy in oropharyngeal dysphagia carried out by speech therapists. Thus, the review excludes reports of surgical or pharmacological treatments. The literature search was performed using the electronic databases PubMed and Embase. All available inclusion dates up to November 2008 were used. The search was limited to English, German, French, Spanish, and Dutch publications. MESH terms were supplemented by using free-text words (for the period after January 2005). Fifty-nine studies were included. In general, statistically significant positive therapy effects were found. However, the number of papers was rather small. Moreover, diverse methodological problems were found in many of these studies. For most studies, the conclusions could not be generalized; comparison was hindered by the range of diagnoses, types of therapies, and evaluation techniques. Many questions remain about the effects of therapy in oropharyngeal dysphagia as performed by speech and language therapists. Although some positive significant outcome studies have been published, further research based on randomized controlled trials is needed

Maximum phonation time: variability and reliability

The objective of the study was to determine maximum phonation time reliability as a function of the number of trials, days, and raters in dysphonic and control subjects. Two groups of adult subjects participated in this reliability study: a group of outpatients with functional or organic dysphonia versus a group of healthy control subjects matched by age and gender. Over a period of maximally 6 weeks, three video recordings were made of five subjects' maximum phonation time trials. A panel of five experts were responsible for all measurements, including a repeated measurement of the subjects' first recordings. Patients showed significantly shorter maximum phonation times compared with healthy controls (on average, 6.6 seconds shorter). The averaged interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) over all raters per trial for the first day was 0.998. The averaged reliability coefficient per rater and per trial for repeated measurements of the first day's data was 0.997, indicating high intrarater reliability. The mean reliability coefficient per day for one trial was 0.939. When using five trials, the reliability increased to 0.987. The reliability over five trials for a single day was 0.836; for 2 days, 0.911; and for 3 days, 0.935. To conclude, the maximum phonation time has proven to be a highly reliable measure in voice assessment. A single rater is sufficient to provide highly reliable measurements