ArticleDysphagia2019
Evaluating the Feasibility and Validity of Using Trained Allied Health Assistants to Assist in Mealtime Monitoring of Dysphagic Patients.
Article in Dysphagia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Outpatient physiotherapy versus home-based rehabilitation for patients at risk of poor outcomes after knee arthroplasty: CORKA RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2020Trial
- Nursing Assistant in Italy: The Principle of Delegation of Health Activities and Liability Profiles.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Article
- Implementation of the Allied Health Assistant Workforce in the Australian Context: An Integrative Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Review
- Delegation of patient related tasks to allied health assistants: a time motion study.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- The challenges and gains of delivering a home-exercise intervention: a qualitative study of physiotherapists and physiotherapy assistants.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Growing patient numbers, within a context of finite resources, has placed increased demands on dysphagia services in acute settings. Delegating some aspects of dysphagia management to other trained professional groups, such as allied health assistants (AHA), may help speech-language pathology (SLP) service efficiencies. The primary aim of this study was to explore the feasibility and initial validity of using trained AHAs to complete structured mealtime observations of patients. The secondary aims were to explore costs and user perceptions. The study used a mixed methods design. All AHAs who participated worked in the adult acute inpatient setting and were agreeable to participate; they successfully completed training and were deemed competent to use the observation tool. To explore validity, trained AHAs (n = 7) and SLPs (n = 5) conducted independent, simultaneous mealtime observations of 50 adult inpatients, using a structured observation form. Costs of AHA versus SLP time per average assessment were compared. Consumer perceptions were examined in semi-structured interviews with the AHA (n = 5) and SLP participants (n = 3). Exact agreement between AHA and SLPs on the overall pass/fail criteria was high (94%). Where exact agreement was not achieved, the AHA had made a more conservative decision. Salary costs and time savings for the SLP were identified. Interviews identified that both SLPs and AHAs perceived multiple positive personal and service benefits. High levels of agreement in clinical decisions and positive staff perceptions support feasibility and initial clinical validity. This model may assist SP efficiencies in services with high patient demand.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30259118What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.