This position document has been developed by the Dysphagia Working Group, a committee of members from the European Society for Swallowing Disorders and the European Union Geriatric Medicine Society, and invited experts. It consists of 12 sections that cover all aspects of clinical management of oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) related to geriatric medicine and discusses prevalence, quality of life, and legal and ethical issues, as well as health economics and social burden. OD constitutes impaired or uncomfortable transit of food or liquids from the oral cavity to the esophagus, and it is included in the World Health Organization’s classification of diseases. It can cause severe complications such as malnutrition, dehydration, respiratory infections, aspiration pneumonia, and increased readmissions, institutionalization, and morbimortality. OD is a prevalent and serious problem among all phenotypes of older patients as oropharyngeal swallow response is impaired in older people and can cause aspiration. Despite its prevalence and severity, OD is still underdiagnosed and untreated in many medical centers. There are several validated clinical and instrumental methods (videofluoroscopy and fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing) to diagnose OD, and treatment is mainly based on compensatory measures, although new treatments to stimulate the oropharyngeal swallow response are under research. OD matches the definition of a geriatric syndrome as it is highly prevalent among older people, is caused by multiple factors, is associated with several comorbidities and poor prognosis, and needs a multidimensional approach to be treated. OD should be given more importance and attention and thus be included in all standard screening protocols, treated, and regularly monitored to prevent its main complications. More research is needed to develop and standardize new treatments and management protocols for older patients with OD, which is a challenging mission for our societies.

This study compares the effects of traditional logopedic dysphagia treatment with those of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) as adjunct to therapy on the quality of life in patients with Parkinson’s disease and oropharyngeal dysphagia. Eighty-eight patients were randomized over three treatment groups. Traditional logopedic dysphagia treatment and traditional logopedic dysphagia treatment combined with NMES at sensor or motor level stimulation were compared. At three times (pretreatment, post-treatment, and 3 months following treatment), two quality-of-life questionnaires (SWAL-QOL and MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory) and a single-item Dysphagia Severity Scale were scored. The Functional Oral Intake Scale was used to assess the dietary intake. After therapy, all groups showed significant improvement on the Dysphagia Severity Scale and restricted positive effects on quality of life. Minimal group differences were found. These effects remained unchanged 3 months following treatment. No significant correlations were found between dietary intake and quality of life. Logopedic dysphagia treatment results in a restricted increased quality of life in patients with Parkinson’s disease. In this randomized controlled trial, all groups showed significant therapy effects on the Dysphagia Severity Scale and restricted improvements on the SWAL-QOL and the MDADI. However, only slight nonsignificant differences between groups were found.

Medical and paramedical treatments should be evaluated according to current standards of evidence-based medicine. Evaluation of therapy in oropharyngeal dysphagia fits into this growing interest. A systematic review is given of the literature on the effects of therapy in oropharyngeal dysphagia carried out by speech therapists. Thus, the review excludes reports of surgical or pharmacological treatments. The literature search was performed using the electronic databases PubMed and Embase. All available inclusion dates up to November 2008 were used. The search was limited to English, German, French, Spanish, and Dutch publications. MESH terms were supplemented by using free-text words (for the period after January 2005). Fifty-nine studies were included. In general, statistically significant positive therapy effects were found. However, the number of papers was rather small. Moreover, diverse methodological problems were found in many of these studies. For most studies, the conclusions could not be generalized; comparison was hindered by the range of diagnoses, types of therapies, and evaluation techniques. Many questions remain about the effects of therapy in oropharyngeal dysphagia as performed by speech and language therapists. Although some positive significant outcome studies have been published, further research based on randomized controlled trials is needed.

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) technique is a dual-channel electrotherapy system designed specifically for the treatment of pharyngeal dysfunction. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the outcome of NMES versus traditional swallowing therapy (TT) in stroke patients. Three European swallowing centers participated in this randomized trial. Twenty-five patients (16 men and 9 women) were included. Twelve patients were randomized for NMES and 13 for TT. Mean age was 70 years for the NMES group and 71 years for the TT group. Inclusion criteria were (1) patients 50-80 years old with cerebrovascular disease (stroke) for more than 3 months before the study, (2) only patients with hemispheric stroke, (3) no brainstem involvement, (4) ability to swallow, and (5) ability to communicate. Pre- and post-trial measurements were videoradiographic swallowing evaluation, nutritional status, oral motor function test, and a visual analog scale (VAS) for self-evaluation of complaints. All subjects received 15 therapy sessions. Statistically significant positive therapy effects for both NMES and TT combined were found, but there was no statistically significant difference in therapy effect between the groups. The correlations between measurements were low. The patient's subjective experience of improvement had low correlation with the outcome from the objective evaluation.

No abstract

On the grounds of this study, it is concluded that further research is needed on the exact mechanism of SES and its effects on the neural pathways involved in swallowing.

This systematic review explores the effects of dysphagia treatment for Parkinson's disease. The review includes rehabilitative, surgical, pharmacologic, and other treatments. Only oropharyngeal dysphagia is selected for this literature search, excluding dysphagia due to esophageal or gastric disorders. The effects of deep brain stimulation on dysphagia are not included. In general, the literature concerning dysphagia treatment in Parkinson's disease is rather limited. Most effect studies show diverse methodologic problems. Multiple case studies and trials are identified by searching biomedical literature databases PubMed and Embase, and by hand-searching reference lists. The conclusions of most studies cannot be compared with one another because of heterogeneous therapy methods and outcome measures. Further research based on randomized controlled trials to determine the effectiveness of different therapies for dysphagia in Parkinson's disease is required.

This study analyzed the effect that dysphagia etiology, different observers, and bolus consistency might have on the level of agreement for measurements in FEES images reached by independent versus consensus panel rating. Sixty patients were included and divided into two groups according to dysphagia etiology: neurological or head and neck oncological. All patients underwent standardized FEES examination using thin and thick liquid consistencies. Two observers scored the same exams, first independently and then in a consensus panel. Four ordinal FEES variables were analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed using a linear weighted kappa coefficient and Bayesian multilevel model. Intra- and interobserver agreement on FEES measurements ranged from 0.76 to 0.93 and from 0.61 to 0.88, respectively. Dysphagia etiology did not influence observers’ agreement level. However, bolus consistency resulted in decreased interobserver agreement for all measured FEES variables during thin liquid swallows. When rating on the consensus panel, the observers deviated considerably from the scores they had previously given on the independent rating task. Observer agreement on measurements in FEES exams was influenced by bolus consistency, not by dysphagia etiology. Therefore, observer agreement on FEES measurements should be analyzed by taking bolus consistency into account, as it might affect the interpretation of the outcome. Identifying factors that might influence agreement levels could lead to better understanding of the rating process and assist in developing a more precise measurement scale that would ensure higher levels of observer agreement for measurements in FEES exams.