Purpose To develop a European White Paper document on oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) in head and neck cancer (HNC). There are wide variations in the management of OD associated with HNC across Europe. Methods Experts in the management of specific aspects of OD in HNC across Europe were delegated by their professional medical and multidisciplinary societies to contribute to this document. Evidence is based on systematic reviews, consensus-based position statements, and expert opinion. Results Twenty-four sections on HNC-specific OD topics. Conclusion This European White Paper summarizes current best practice on management of OD in HNC, providing recommendations to support patients and health professionals. The body of literature and its level of evidence on diagnostics and treatment for OD in HNC remain poor. This is in the context of an expected increase in the prevalence of OD due to HNC in the near future. Contributing factors to increased prevalence include aging of our European population (including HNC patients) and an increase in human papillomavirus (HPV) related cancer, despite the introduction of HPV vaccination in various countries. We recommend timely implementation of OD screening in HNC patients while emphasizing the need for robust scientific research on the treatment of OD in HNC. Meanwhile, its management remains a challenge for European professional associations and policymakers.

BackgroundDysphagia is a significant side-effect following treatment for head and neck cancers, yet poor adherence to swallowing exercises is frequently reported in intervention studies. Behaviour change techniques (BCTs) can be used to improve adherence, but no review to date has described the techniques or indicated which may be more associated with improved swallowing outcomes.MethodsA systematic review was conducted to identify behavioural strategies in swallowing interventions, and to explore any relationships between these strategies and intervention effects. Randomised and quasi-randomised studies of head and neck cancer patients were included. Behavioural interventions to improve swallowing were eligible provided a valid measure of swallowing function was reported. A validated and comprehensive list of 93 discrete BCTs was used to code interventions. Analysis was conducted via a structured synthesis approach.ResultsFifteen studies (8 randomised) were included, and 20 different BCTs were each identified in at least one intervention. The BCTs identified in almost all interventions were: instruction on how to perform the behavior, setting behavioural goals and action planning. The BCTs that occurred more frequently in effective interventions, were: practical social support, behavioural practice, self-monitoring of behaviour and credible source for example a skilled clinician delivering the intervention. The presence of identical BCTs in comparator groups may diminish effects.ConclusionsSwallowing interventions feature multiple components that may potentially impact outcomes. This review maps the behavioural components of reported interventions and provides a method to consistently describe these components going forward. Future work may seek to test the most effective BCTs, to inform optimisation of swallowing interventions.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2990-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The swallowing outcome after laryngectomy (SOAL) questionnaire is a simple, self-administered tool to assess swallowing function post-total laryngectomy. Further specific testing with a laryngectomy cohort is necessary for full validation. Its potential value lies in screening for dysphagia in clinics or during long-term follow-up of laryngectomees.

Poor patient adherence to swallowing exercises is commonly reported in the dysphagia literature on patients treated for head and neck cancer. Establishing the effectiveness of exercise interventions for this population may be undermined by patient non-adherence. The purpose of this study was to explore the barriers and facilitators to exercise adherence from a patient perspective, and to determine the best strategies to reduce the barriers and enhance the facilitators. In-depth interviews were conducted on thirteen patients. We used a behaviour change framework and model [Theoretical domains framework and COM-B (Capability–opportunity–motivation-behaviour) model] to inform our interview schedule and structure our results, using a content analysis approach. The most frequent barrier identified was psychological capability. This was highlighted by patient reports of not clearly understanding reasons for the exercises, forgetting to do the exercises and not having a system to keep track. Other barriers included feeling overwhelmed by information at a difficult time (lack of automatic motivation) and pain and fatigue (lack of physical capability). Main facilitators included having social support from family and friends, the desire to prevent negative consequences such as long-term tube feeding (reflective motivation), having the skills to do the exercises (physical capability), having a routine or trigger and receiving feedback on the outcome of doing exercises (automatic motivation). Linking these findings back to the theoretical model allows for a more systematic selection of theory-based strategies that may enhance the design of future swallowing exercise interventions for patients with head and neck cancer.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00455-017-9799-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: Ultrasound (US) is not widely used as part of the speech and language therapy (SLT) clinical toolkit. The COVID-19 pandemic has intensified interest in US as an alternative to SLT instrumental tools such as the videofluoroscopic swallowing study (VFSS), fibreoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) and endoscopic evaluation of the larynx (EEL) as a non-invasive, non-aerosol-generating procedure that can be delivered at the bedside to assess swallowing and/or laryngeal function. To establish the appropriacy of routine US use, and in response to a national professional body request for a position statement, a group of expert SLTs conducted a rapid review of the literature. Aim: To explore critically the clinical utility of US as an assessment tool for swallowing and laryngeal function in adults. Methods & Procedures: A rapid review of four databases was completed to identify articles using US to assess swallowing and/or laryngeal function in adults compared with reference tests (VFSS/FEES/EEL/validated outcome measure). Screening was completed according to predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria and 10% of abstracts were rescreened to assess reliability. Data were extracted from full texts using a predeveloped form. The QUADAS-2 tool was used for quality ratings. Information from included studies was summarized using narrative synthesis and visual illustration. Outcomes & Results: Ten papers used US to assess swallowing, and 13 to assess laryngeal function. All were peerreviewed primary studies across a range of clinical populations and with a wide geographical spread. Four papers had an overall low risk of bias, but the remaining 19 had at least one domain where risk of bias was judged as high or unclear. Applicability concerns were identified in all papers. The papers that used US to assess swallowing varied widely in terms of the anatomical structures assessed and methodology employed. The papers assessing laryngeal function were more homogenous in their methodology. Sensitivity and specificity data were provided for 12 of the laryngeal function papers with ranges of 64.3-100% and 48.5-100%, respectively. Conclusions & Implications: There is burgeoning evidence to support the use of US as an adjunct to SLT clinical assessment of swallowing and laryngeal function. However, the current literature does not support its use as a

Background The COVID‐19 pandemic and the UK government's subsequent coronavirus action plan have fundamentally impacted on every aspect of healthcare. One area that is severely affected is ear, nose and throat (ENT)/laryngology where speech and language therapists (SLTs) engage in a diverse range of practice with patients with a range of conditions, including voice disorders, airway problems, and head and neck cancers (HNCs). A large majority of these patients are in high‐risk categories, and many specialized clinical practices are vulnerable. In addition, workforce and research issues are challenged in both the immediate context and the future. Aims To discuss the threats and opportunities from the COVID‐19 pandemic for SLTs in ENT/laryngology with specific reference to clinical practice, workforce and research leadership. Methods & Procedures The relevant sections of the World Health Organisation's (WHO) health systems building blocks framework (2007) were used to structure the study. Expert agreement was determined by an iterative process of multiple‐group discussions, the use of all recent relevant policy documentation, and other literature and shared documentation/writing. The final paper was verified and agreed by all authors. Main Contribution The main threats to ENT/laryngology SLT clinical services include increased patient complexity related to COVID‐19 voice and airway problems, delayed HNC diagnosis, reduced access to instrumental procedures and inequitable care provision. The main clinical opportunities include the potential for new modes of service delivery and collaborations, and harnessing SLT expertise in non‐instrumental assessment. There are several workforce issues, including redeployment (and impact on current services), training implications and psychological impact on staff. Workforce opportunities exist for service innovation and potential extended ENT/SLT practice roles. Research is threatened by a reduction in immediate funding calls and high competition. Current research is affected by very limited access to participants and the ability to conduct face‐to‐face and instrumental assessments. However, research opportunities may result in greater collaboration, and changes in service delivery necessitate robust investigation and evaluation. A new national set of research priorities is likely to emerge. Conclusions & Implications The immediate impact of the pandemic has resulted in major disruption to all aspects of clinical delivery, workforce and research for ENT/laryngology SLT. It is unclear when any of these areas will resume operations and whether permanent changes to clinical practice, professional remits and research priorities will follow. However, significant opportunity exists in the post‐COVID era to re‐evaluate current practice, embrace opportunities and evaluate new ways of working.

Swallow function recovery postsurgery is better in patients with higher FOIS presurgery, smaller tumors, and no requirement for radiotherapy.

Purpose Patients newly diagnosed with head and neck cancer should be informed of the ramifications of cancer treatment on swallowing function during their pretreatment consultation. The purpose of this study was to explore (a) the usefulness and (b) the acceptability of video-animation in helping patients to understand the basics of the swallowing mechanism and dysphagia. Method Thirteen patients treated for head and neck cancer participated in this study. Think-aloud, a type of qualitative methodology, was used to encourage patients to verbalize their thoughts while watching two short video-animations showing the process of normal/abnormal swallowing. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Results Four main themes were identified as follows: (a) patient interest and engagement, (b) acceptability of visual imagery and narration, (c) information provision and learning, and (d) personal relevance and intended action. Patients appeared interested and engaged in the video-animations, asking several spontaneous questions about how to maintain or improve swallowing function. Learning was evident from patients' recognition and verbalizations of grossly disordered swallowing patterns. Most patients reported the images to be visually acceptable and could often relate what they were seeing to their own swallowing experience. Many patients also verbalized recognition of the need to keep muscles active through exercises. Conclusions These results suggest that the video-animations of swallowing were acceptable, interesting, informative, and relevant for most patients. It was therefore useful not only as an education tool, but also showed potential to influence patients' intentions to undertake preventative interventions that may preserve better swallowing function after cancer treatment.