Patient Reported Outcome Measures in Dysphagia Research Following Stroke: A Scoping Review and Qualitative Analysis.
Jennifer Moloney, Julie Regan, Margaret Walshe
PMID 35467246WHAT IT FOUND
Most stroke dysphagia trials ignore patient experience.
The two common tools miss environmental barriers like support and attitudes. Use them with caution, knowing they do not capture the social impact of swallowing problems.
Key findings
01Only 12 of 110 included trials used a validated patient-reported outcome measure.
02The SWAL-QOL and EAT-10 do not assess Environmental Factors such as social support or attitudes.
03The SWAL-QOL may be difficult for patients with cognitive or communication impairments due to complex rating scales.
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.
What it does not show
The review was restricted to randomised controlled trials, which may have excluded other relevant studies. Many included trials were from the US and China, potentially limiting the generalisability of the findings. The mapping of outcome measures to frameworks involves subjective interpretation, which could affect the identification of gaps. The study did not assess all available patient-reported outcome measures, only those commonly used in the included trials.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The study was supported by the Health and Social Care Research, Development and Innovation (HSC RDI) Office in Northern Ireland.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that the SWAL-QOL and EAT-10 are invalid for measuring quality of life. They are validated tools, but this review shows they are incomplete because they miss environmental factors. The finding is about their scope, not their accuracy in what they do measure.