Psychometric Properties of Visuoperceptual Measures of Videofluoroscopic and Fibre-Endoscopic Evaluations of Swallowing: A Systematic Review
Fibreoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) and Videofluoroscopic Swallow Studies (VFSS) are instrumental assessments of dysphagia which provide videos of the internal structures of swallowing. They are commonly regarded as ‘gold-standard’ assessments; however, there is no consensus regarding a gold-standard measure to analyse the video recordings that they produce. Measures require sound psychometric properties to be suitable for clinical or research purposes. To date, no review of psychometric properties of FEES and VFSS measures has been undertaken or formally reported. This review assessed the quality of the psychometric properties of visuoperceptual measures of FEES and VFSS. Electronic databases were searched for studies reporting on psychometric qualities of visuoperceptual measures which are used to analyse recordings from FEES and VFSS. All dates until February 2017 were included. The Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist was used to evaluate the methodical quality of studies. The measures’ overall quality was then assessed by combining COSMIN ratings with quality criteria. Forty-five studies, reporting on 39 measures, met the inclusion criteria for this review. Data about the measures’ psychometric properties were very limited. Twenty-one measures had information available about reliability only, while 18 had information on up to five of the possible nine psychometric properties categorised within the COSMIN framework. The majority of the FEES and VFSS measures’ psychometric properties were rated as ‘indeterminate’ overall, due to the small number of studies, issues with design, statistical analyses, and reporting practices of extant studies. There is insufficient evidence to recommend any individual measure included in this review as valid and reliable to interpret VFSS and FEES recordings. Further research, which utilises robust methodological design and reporting, is needed to examine the psychometric properties of measures for FEES and VFSS.
KeywordsVideofluoroscopy Fibre-endoscopic evaluations of swallowing Dysphagia Deglutition Measure Psychometrics
The first author completed this study as part of the requirements for the completion of a PhD under supervision of Associate Profesor Reinie Cordier, Associate Profesor Ted Brown, and Profesor Renée Speyer. The authors wish to acknowledge Curtin University and the Australian Federal Government for the Curtin University Postgraduate Scholarship (CUPS) and the Australian Government Research Training Program Stipend Scholarship. The authors of the study would like to thank Ms Amy Hodges, who assisted with abstract screening and instrument ratings.
The authors KS, RC, TB and RS have conceived, designed, and performed the experiment, contributed materials/analysis tools and to the writing of the paper. The authors KS and RS have analysed the data.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.
- 27.Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res. 2010;19(4):539–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Terwee CB. An overview of systematic reviews of measurement properties of outcome measurement instruments that intend to measure (aspects of) health status or (health- related) quality of life. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics VU University Medical Center Amsterdam, the Netherlands: The COSMIN group. 2014.Google Scholar
- 34.Centre for Reviews Dissemination. Systematic reviews: CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. Layerthorpe, York: CRD University of York; 2009.Google Scholar
- 52.Leonard R, Kendall K. Dysphagia assessment and treatment planning: a team approach. Boston: Cengage Learning; 1997.Google Scholar
- 59.Scott AG. The development of a scale to assess swallowing function in motor neuron disease using videofluoroscopic techniques. Melbourne: La Trobe University; 1999.Google Scholar
- 76.Park WY, Lee TH, Ham NS, Park JW, Lee YG, Cho SJ, et al. Adding endoscopist-directed flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing to the videofluoroscopic swallowing study increased the detection rates of penetration, aspiration, and pharyngeal residue. Gut Liver. 2015;9(5):623.Google Scholar
- 77.Farneti D. Pooling score: an endoscopic model for evaluating severity of dysphagia. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2008;28(3):135.Google Scholar
- 79.Farneti D, Fattori B, Nacci A, Mancini V, Simonelli M, Ruoppolo G, et al. The Pooling-score (P-score): inter-and intra-rater reliability in endoscopic assessment of the severity of dysphagia. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2014;34(2):105.Google Scholar
- 84.Butler SG, Stuart A, Case LD, Rees C, Vitolins M, Kritchevsky SB. Effects of liquid type, delivery method, and bolus volume on penetration-aspiration scores in healthy older adults during flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2011;120(5):288–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 86.Gullung JL, Hill EG, Castell DO, Martin-Harris B. Oropharyngeal and Esophageal Swallowing Impairments: their association and the predictive value of the modified barium swallow impairment profile and combined multichannel intraluminal impedance—esophageal manometry. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2012;121(11):738–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 87.Logemann JA. Manual for the videofluorographic study of swallowing. Austin: Pro ed; 1993.Google Scholar
- 90.Streiner DL, Norman GR, Cairney J. Item response theory. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2014.Google Scholar
- 92.Duong M. Introduction to item response theory and its applications. Michigan: Michigan State University; 2004.Google Scholar