Assessing penetration and aspiration: how do videofluoroscopy and fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing compare?

Annette M. Kelly, Michael J. Drinnan, Paula Leslie

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Objectives/Hypothesis: We aimed to investigate whether the type of dysphagia examination (fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing [FEES] or videofluoroscopy) influences the scoring of penetration and aspiration.

Study Design: Prospective, single-blind study.

Methods: Fifteen dysphagic participants were recruited and underwent one FEES and one videofluoroscopy examination, performed and recorded simultaneously. Fifteen independent raters from 12 centers scored penetration and aspiration from recordings using the Penetration Aspiration Scale. Raters were blind to participant details, the pairing of the FEES and videofluoroscopy recordings, and the other raters' scores. Interrater and intrarater reliability were analyzed using weighted kappa.

Results: The Penetration Aspiration Scale scores were significantly higher for the FEES recordings than for the videofluoroscopy recordings (ANOVA P < .001). The mean difference between the FEES and videofluoroscopy penetration aspiration scores for the same swallows was 1.15 points. Interrater and intrarater reliability ranged from 0.64 to 0.79 (weighted kappa).

Conclusions: Penetration aspiration is perceived to be greater (more severe) from FEES than videofluoroscopy images. The clinical implications are discussed.

Bibliography
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1723-1727
Number of pages5
JournalLaryngoscope
Volume117
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Assessing penetration and aspiration: how do videofluoroscopy and fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing compare?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this