Test environment running 7.6.6

Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Swallowing outcome measures in head and neck cancer - How do they compare?

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Abstract

SummaryObjectives Dysphagia is a common and debilitating side effect of chemoradiotherapy. Assessment is difficult; swallowing is multifactorial and studies choose from a range of dysphagia assessments. This study intended to investigate the relationship between swallowing assessments of dysphagia in a cohort of patients and to evaluate whether clinical swallowing measures can predict patient reported swallowing outcomes. Materials and methods One hundred and seventy-three head and neck cancer patients from two teaching hospitals were recruited prospectively over 25 months. At three months follow-up patients were assessed using Rosenbeck's Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS), The 100 ml Water Swallow Test (WST), The Performance Status Scale: Normalcy of Diet and the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI). Results The highest correlation was observed between the MDADI and Normalcy of Diet (rho 0.68) and the lowest between the MDADI and the PAS (rho 0.34). Using multiple regression the PAS and WST accounted for 44% of the variance in the MDADI scores (R2 = 0.44, F = 37.8, p < 0.001). On stepwise regression, the model only retained the Normalcy of Diet scores (R2 = 0.42, F = 107.9, p < 0.001). Separating the PAS into subgroups, those with no penetration or aspiration on the PAS scored significantly higher on the MDADI (p = <0.001). Conclusion Patient reported swallowing outcomes were strongly aligned with diet restrictions but poorly aligned with clinical assessment. The WST, however, was more correlated than the PAS score, representing a more functional assessment. Clinical dysphagia, associated with significant morbidity, and patient reported dysphagia related to quality of life are not interchangeable and must be measured separately.

Description

Citation

Source

Oral Oncology

Book Title

Entity type

Access Statement

License Rights

Restricted until