PTOTSLPCohortArchives of physical medicine and rehabilitation2022

Determining the Prevalence, Implementation Approaches, and Opinions of Above Cuff Vocalization: A Survey of Health Care Professionals.

Claire S Mills, Emilia Michou, Mark C Bellamy and 3 others

PMID 34562433

WHAT IT FOUND

Health professionals report huge variability in how they deliver above cuff vocalization, with no standard approach to timing, safety checks, or staff training.

Most use it with fewer than ten patients a month, and few collect any outcome measures to track whether it is actually working.

Key findings

01There is no standardized approach to the delivery of above cuff vocalization, with huge variability in safety processes, training, and assessment.

02Most services use above cuff vocalization with small numbers of patients, and few collect outcome measures to evaluate its effect.

03Perceived benefits are reported for communication and mood, but few respondents see these translating into functional gains like earlier oral intake or decannulation.

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 survey used convenience sampling via social media and professional networks, which may have introduced selection bias. The participation rate was low at 9%, meaning most who saw the survey did not complete it. Responses were predominantly from the UK and from speech and language therapists, so findings may not apply to other countries or professional groups. The survey was in English, which may have limited responses from non-English speaking countries. Data were self-reported and subjective, with no verification of actual practice or outcomes. Few respondents collected outcome measures, so perceptions of benefit may not reflect actual effectiveness.

Declared interests

No conflicts of interest or funding sources are explicitly stated in the provided text.

The easy way to misread this

Do not interpret the high perceived benefits of above cuff vocalization as evidence that it is effective. Only 11% of respondents collected outcome measures, and the authors note that clinicians often overestimate benefits when outcomes are subjective. The variability in implementation also means there is no standard approach to replicate.

Read it on PubMed →