The collaboration of RTs and SLPs in German centers for weaning from mechanical ventilation in neurological and neurosurgical early rehabilitation - results from an online survey.
Katrin Eibl, Martin Groß, Martina Hielscher-Fastabend
One-third of SLPs in German weaning units had no RT at all.
Where both are present, RTs report more collaboration than SLPs do, and each group rates itself as having more influence than the other. SLPs lead communication; RTs lead secretion and tube work.
Key findings
1Significantly more RTs reported regular collaboration with SLPs than the reverse, and one-third of SLPs (33.3%, n = 9) had no RT available at their workplace.
2Both groups rated their own influence on tracheostomy, communication, and secretion decisions higher than the other group's. SLPs were perceived as leading communication decisions; RTs were perceived as leading secretion management and tube changes.
3All RTs (100%) participated in ward rounds compared with 59.3% of SLPs, and RTs were significantly more likely than SLPs to recommend routine FEES for every tracheostomized patient.
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
Only 43 clinicians completed the survey, and the total number of SLPs and RTs working in these units is unknown, so the response rate cannot be calculated. One-third of SLP respondents had no RT at their workplace and were excluded from the role-perception analyses, so the collaboration data reflect only the subset where both professions are present. The survey captured self-reported perceptions and self-reported task frequency, not observed practice or patient outcomes. Respondents could not be paired by institution, so it is impossible to compare how an SLP and an RT in the same unit see the same task. The survey did not include occupational therapists, who in some German institutions handle dysphagia and tracheostomy management, nor phoniatricians. The coauthor Martin Gross is the lead of the DGNR certification commission whose criteria the survey examines, which may have shaped the questions and the framing of the results.
Declared interests
No financial support was received. However, coauthor Martin Gross is the lead of the DGNR certification commission that the survey evaluates, and the survey was developed with input from a neurointensivist who is also a coauthor.
The easy way to misread this
This is a survey of what 43 clinicians think about their roles, not a study of what happens to patients. The collaboration and influence numbers describe perceptions, not observed practice. And because one-third of the SLP respondents had no RT to collaborate with at all, the 'collaboration gap' is partly an artefact of staffing, not of professional attitude.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →