ArticleJournal of the Intensive Care Society2022
The adaptation of the Leeds Post-Extubation Dysphagia Screen: Lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Article in Journal of the Intensive Care Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Current opinion of presentation of dysphagia and dysphonia in patients with coronavirus disease 2019.Current opinion in otolaryngology & head and neck surgery · 2022Review
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
Introduction: Post-extubation dysphagia (PED) can have serious consequences for critically unwell patients. COVID-19 has resulted in an increasing need for a PED screen in order to effectively identify patients and mitigate risk, whilst balancing under-resourced services. Online training provides the advantage of reducing time pressures on staff and supporting social distancing. This project aimed to adapt the Leeds Post-Extubation Dysphagia Screen (L-PEDS) and the associated training package to be more suitable and effective for use during COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: The screen was modified to a digital format with additional guidance for users. The training package was shortened and converted to an online package while keeping the interactive mode of training. Results: Preliminary results of 14 staff members indicate that the median confidence levels for screening patients for PED improved from 5 to 8 (on a scale of 0 to 10) after completing the L-PEDS-COVID training package. Likewise, knowledge of PED improved from a median of 4 to 8 (on a scale of 0 to 10). Training quality was rated at a median of 8 on a scale of 0 to 10 (0 being very poor; 10 being very good). Conclusions: Preliminary evidence demonstrated increased knowledge of PED and confidence in screening. The development of an adapted version of the L-PEDS and online training package may allow easier implementation of post-extubation dysphagia screening. This could help to compensate for insufficient speech and language therapy critical care staffing, assist in identifying patients at risk and improve outcomes by enabling earlier and safe resumption of oral intake.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.