Objective The primary aim of this review is to evaluate the effects of non-invasive brain stimulation on post-stroke dysphagia. Methods Thirteen databases were systematically searched through July 2014. Studies had to meet pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Each study's methodological quality was examined. Effect sizes were calculated from extracted data and combined for an overall summary statistic. Results Eight randomized controlled trials were included. These trials revealed a significant, moderate pooled effect size (0.55; 95% CI = 0.17, 0.93; p = 0.004). Studies stimulating the affected hemisphere had a combined effect size of 0.46 (95% CI = −0.18, 1.11; p = 0.16); studies stimulating the unaffected hemisphere had a combined effect size of 0.65 (95% CI = 0.14, 1.16; p = 0.01). At long-term follow up, three studies demonstrated a large but non-significant pooled effect size (0.81, p = 0.11). Conclusions This review found evidence for the efficacy of non-invasive brain stimulation on post-stroke dysphagia. A significant effect size resulted when stimulating the unaffected rather than the affected hemisphere. This finding is in agreement with previous studies implicating the plasticity of cortical neurons in the unaffected hemisphere. Significance Non-invasive brain stimulation appears to assist cortical reorganization in post-stroke dysphagia but emerging factors highlight the need for more data.

This analysis suggests a preventive effect of oral care on pneumonia in nonventilated individuals. This effect, however, should be interpreted with caution due to risk of bias in the included trials.

Sensory impairment detected by the air pulse method does not appear to be associated with risk of penetration/aspiration. Significant laryngeal sensory loss revealed by the touch method is associated with compromised airway protection.

The laryngeal adductor reflex (LAR) is an airway protective reflex that manifests as a brief vocal fold closure in response to laryngeal stimulation. This study examined if the absence of the LAR in response to touch delivered by a laryngoscope is associated with penetration/aspiration or pneumonia in patients with dysphagia. Inpatients at a teaching hospital with clinical symptoms of dysphagia were recruited upon referral to the otolaryngology clinic for a swallowing evaluation. Otolaryngologists observed the status of secretions and touched each arytenoid with the tip of the laryngoscope. The patients were then asked to swallow 3-5 mL grape gelatin and 3-5 mL colored water. All procedures were video-recorded. Two independent raters noted absence/presence of the LAR and penetration/aspiration of pharyngeal secretions, gelatin, and water on the recorded videos. A diagnosis of pneumonia during the patient's entire hospital stay was determined by a review of the hospital's medical records. Statistical analyses were performed using Fisher's exact test. Sixty-one patients were included. Twenty-one patients (34.5%) did not exhibit the LAR. No association was found between the absent LAR and penetration or aspiration. There was, however, a significant association between an absence of the LAR and pneumonia development. Patients with an absent LAR had 6.8 times the odds of developing pneumonia as compared to those with a present LAR (OR 6.75; 95% CI 1.76-25.96; p < 0.01). Using the LAR as a marker of laryngeal sensory function appears to be valuable for identifying patients at high risk of pneumonia.

There was no significant difference in the risk of pneumonia in aspirating patients who took thin liquids with safety strategies compared with those who took thickened liquids only. This result, however, is generalizable only for patients with low risk of pneumonia.

The findings of this study indicated that 0.2 mL of 4% lidocaine enhanced exam tolerability and did not impair the swallow in dysphagic patients.

On April 14, the Society of Swallowing and Dysphagia of Japan (SSDJ) proposed its position statement on dysphagia treatment considering the ongoing spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The main routes of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 are physical contact with infected persons and exposure to respiratory droplets. In cases of infection, the nasal cavity and nasopharynx have the highest viral load in the body. Swallowing occurs in the oral cavity and pharynx, which correspond to the sites of viral proliferation. In addition, the possibility of infection by aerosol transmission is also concerning. Dysphagia treatment includes a broad range of clinical assessments and examinations, dysphagia rehabilitation, oral care, nursing care, and surgical treatments. Any of these can lead to the production of droplets and aerosols, as well as contact with viral particles. In terms of proper infection control measures, all healthcare professionals involved in dysphagia treatment must be fully briefed and must appropriately implement all measures. In addition, most patients with dysphagia should be considered to be at a higher risk for severe illness from COVID-19 because they are elderly and have complications including heart diseases, diabetes, respiratory diseases, and cerebrovascular diseases.

Background: There is no appropriately validated scale with which to rate the problem of residue after swallowing. The Boston Residue and Clearance Scale (BRACS) was developed to meet this need. Initial reliability and validity were assessed. Methods: BRACS is an 11-point ordinal residue rating scale scoring three aspects of residue during a fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES): (1) the amount and location of residue, (2) the presence of spontaneous clearing swallows, and (3) the effectiveness of clearing swallows. To determine inter-rater and test-retest reliability, 63 swallows from previously recorded FEES procedures were scored twice by 4 raters using (1) clinical judgment (none, mild, mild-moderate, moderate, moderate-severe, severe) and (2) BRACS. Concurrent validity was tested by correlating clinical judgment scores with BRACS scores. Internal consistency of the items in BRACS was examined. A factor analysis was performed to identify important factors that suggest grouping within the 12 location items in BRACS. Results: BRACS showed excellent inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC = 0.81), test-retest reliability (ICC: 0.82-0.92), high concurrent validity (Pearson's r = 0.76), and high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.86). Factor analysis revealed 3 main latent factors for the 12 location items. Conclusion: BRACS is a valid and reliable tool that can rate the severity of residue.