ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Dysphagia Care and Management in Rehabilitation: A National Survey.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of Nurse-Led Swallowing Rehabilitation on Swallowing Function, Quality of Life, and Adherence in Patients with Oral Cancer: A Single Center Randomized Controlled Trial.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Development and Validation of the Evaluating Attitudes, Training and Skills in Dysphagia Care (EATS) Questionnaire Among Nursing Home Nurses in Singapore.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dysphagia care and management may differ between countries and healthcare settings. This study aims to describe the management and care of dysphagia in rehabilitation centres and health houses across Norway. Two national surveys were developed targeting either managers or healthcare professionals. Both surveys focused on staff and client populations; screening and assessment of dysphagia; dysphagia management and interventions; staff training and education; and self-perceived quality of dysphagia care. A total of 71 managers and clinicians from 45 out of 68 identified rehabilitation centres and health houses in Norway completed the surveys. The resulting overall response rate was 72.1%. Significant differences in dysphagia care and management were identified between rehabilitation services across Norway. Rehabilitation centres and health houses often had neither a speech therapist among their staff nor had access to external healthcare professionals. Screening was most frequently performed using non-standardised water swallows and only limited data were available on non-instrumental assessments. None of the respondents reported having access to instrumental assessments. Dysphagia interventions mainly consisted of compensatory strategies, including bolus modification, with very infrequent use of rehabilitative interventions, such as swallow manoeuvres. Although almost half of all respondents perceived the overall quality of care for clients with eating and swallowing problems as good, lack of awareness of dysphagia and its symptoms, consequences and options for treatment may have influenced quality ratings. There is a need to raise awareness of dysphagia and provide training opportunities for healthcare professionals in both screening and assessment, and dysphagia care and management.
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.