Development of a Remote Examination of Deglutition Based on Consensus Surveys of Clinicians (Part II): Reliability and Validity in Healthy Elderly Individuals and Oral Cancer Patients.
Fumitaka Omori, Masako Fujiu-Kurachi, Kaori Wada and 1 others
PMID 36167837WHAT IT FOUND
The Remote Examination of Deglutition (RED) is a reliable 13-item screening tool for oral cancer patients.
It matches face-to-face results when used remotely and takes 15 minutes. A score of 8 or less suggests swallowing disorders, while 3 or less indicates aspiration risk.
Key findings
01The RED test showed high internal consistency and agreement between examiners for both face-to-face and remote administration.
02The test accurately identified swallowing disorders and aspiration risk in oral cancer patients, with specific cut-off scores indicating when further instrumental evaluation is needed.
03Remote administration took longer than face-to-face but was well-tolerated by patients, with most finding it easy to answer questions despite some nervousness.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat 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.
What it does not show
The study only included oral cancer patients and healthy elderly individuals, so results do not apply to other populations like stroke or Parkinson's disease. Remote assessments were conducted in a simulated setting within the same hospital building, not in actual homes. The RED is a screening tool, not a comprehensive assessment, and cannot replace detailed clinical evaluation. Some specialized equipment, such as the intraoral camera and pharyngeal microphone, may not be available in all clinical settings.
Declared interests
The study was funded by KAKENHI. The authors declared no other conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not use RED to diagnose swallowing disorders in patients other than oral cancer survivors. The test was validated only in this specific group and healthy elderly individuals, so its accuracy for stroke, head and neck cancer, or neurodegenerative conditions is unknown.