PTOTSLPOtherDysphagia2022

Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Italian Version of the Dysphagia Handicap Index (I-DHI).

Daniela Ginocchio, Aurora Ninfa, Nicole Pizzorni and 3 others

PMID 34581857

WHAT IT FOUND

The Italian Dysphagia Handicap Index is a reliable 25-item questionnaire that takes under ten minutes to complete.

It accurately tracks how swallowing problems affect quality of life in adults with neurological and cancer diagnoses.

Key findings

01The Italian Dysphagia Handicap Index showed satisfactory internal consistency and test-retest reliability across its physical, functional, and emotional subscales.

02Patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia reported significantly higher scores on all subscales of the questionnaire compared to healthy participants, reflecting a worse quality of life.

03The questionnaire is quick and easy to use in practice, with all participants managing to complete it autonomously in no more than ten minutes.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The sample size was relatively small, and the etiologies were dominated by chronic conditions like motor neuron disease, meaning the tool's ability to detect rapid changes in acute patients is unknown. The researchers could not perform a factor analysis due to the sample size, so they cannot definitively prove the questionnaire measures exactly three distinct domains of quality of life. Many patients had to skip the thicker food consistencies during their endoscopy for safety reasons, making it hard to compare questionnaire scores against objective swallowing safety for solids and purees.

The easy way to misread this

Do not assume this questionnaire can track day-to-day recovery or measure exactly three separate domains. The study did not test acute patients who are rapidly improving, and the sample was too small to confirm the underlying structure of the test.

Read it on PubMed →