Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for children with dysphagia: a systematic review

Abstract

ObjectivesDysphagia in childhood has important health impacts for the child and their family as well as the healthcare system. This systematic review aims to determine the effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) for treatment of oropharyngeal dysphagia in children.MethodsA search was performed on November 2020 in MEDLINE (from 1946), EMBASE (from 1947), PsycINFO (from 1806), CINAHL (from 1937), CENTRAL (from 1996) and Scopus (from 1970) databases. Studies of children (≤18 years) diagnosed with oropharyngeal dysphagia using NMES in the throat/neck region were included. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and a modified Newcastle-Ottawa assessment for observational studies. A meta-analysis was not conducted due to clinical heterogeneity in studies.ResultsTen studies were included (5 RCTs, 4 case series, 1 cohort study; including 393 children, mean or median age below 7 years, including children with neurologic impairments). In all studies, swallowing function improved after NMES treatment. The standardised mean difference (SMD) for improvement of swallowing dysfunction in treatment compared with control groups in the RCTs ranged from 0.18 (95% CI −0.7 to 1.06) to 1.49 (95% CI 0.57 to 2.41). Eight of 10 studies reported on the child’s feeding ability, and, with one exception, there was improvement in feeding ability. Few studies reported on health status (N=2), impact on caregiver (N=1), adverse events and harms (N=2), and child’s quality of life (N=1). In most studies, outcome follow-up was less than 6 months. The studies demonstrated moderate to high risk of bias.ConclusionsNMES treatment may be beneficial in improving swallowing function for children with dysphagia, however, given the quality of the studies, inadequate outcome reporting, and short follow-up duration, uncertainty remains. Well-designed RCTs are needed to establish its effectiveness before its adoption in clinical practice.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019147353.