Skip to main content
Log in

McGill Ingestive Skills Assessment (MISA): Development and First Field Test of an Evaluation of Functional Ingestive Skills of Elderly Persons

  • Published:
Dysphagia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is a lack of reliable and valid clinical assessment tools for individuals with loss of ingestive skills. The McGill Ingestive Skills Assessment (MISA) was developed to facilitate the reliable and valid bedside assessment of elderly persons with feeding difficulties. Items were generated by a literature review and selected with the collaboration of a multidisciplinary team. The first version of the MISA comprised 190 items in 7 scales, covering the domains of medical history, mealtime environment, physical characteristics of the patient, food textures consumed, solid ingestion, liquid ingestion, and behaviors related to self-feeding. The first field test for item selection included 50 individuals, aged 60 years and older, living in the community, supervised housing, and long-term care centers. After field testing, 134 items were eliminated due to poor face validity, redundancy, or poor psychometric performance. The remaining 56 items were provided with 4 response categories and were reorganized into 5 scales. The revised version was field tested to determine its preliminary psychometric properties on 33 individuals, 60 years of age and older, residing in a long-term care center. Six items were eliminated due to redundancy after the second field test. Analyses of the revised version resulted in the elimination of another 6 items that were redundant or that demonstrated poor reliability. Internal consistency of all scales is ≥0.86 and interrater agreement is ≥0.92. These analyses suggest that the psychometric properties of the MISA are adequate for diagnosis and treatment planning. This supports its readiness for clinical use following further reliability and validity testing with a larger sample

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. H Siebens H Trupe A Siebens F Cook S Anshen R Hanauer G Oster (1986) ArticleTitleCorrelates and consequences of eating dependency in institutionalized elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc 34 192–198 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BimC2c7jslw%3D Occurrence Handle3950287

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. KL Layne (1990) ArticleTitleFeeding strategies for the dysphagic patient: A nursing perspective. Dysphagia 5 84–88 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By6D3crjsFc%3D Occurrence Handle2119948

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. HM Hudson CR Daubert RH Mills (2000) ArticleTitleThe interdependency of protein-energy malnutrition, aging, and dysphagia. Dysphagia 15 31–38 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3c%2Fmt1Krug%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10594256

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. MJ Feinberg J Knebl J Tully (1996) ArticleTitlePrandial aspiration and pneumonia in an elderly population followed over 3 years. Dysphagia 11 104–109 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BymA3sbgt1c%3D Occurrence Handle8721068

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. JE Croghan EM Burke S Caplan S Denman (1994) ArticleTitlePilot study of 12-month outcomes of nursing home patients with aspiration on videofluoroscopy. Dysphagia 9 141–146 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByuA28zptlE%3D Occurrence Handle8082320

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. JA Logemann (1983) Evaluation and treatment of swallowing disorders. Pro-Ed Austin, TX

    Google Scholar 

  7. A Scott A Perry J Bench (1998) ArticleTitleA study of interrater reliability when using videofluoroscopy as an assessment of swallowing. Dysphagia 13 223–227 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1czosVejsQ%3D%3D Occurrence Handle9716754

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. KV Kuhlemeier P Yates JB Palmer (1998) ArticleTitleIntra- and interrater variation in the evaluation of videofluorographic swallowing studies. Dysphagia 13 142–147 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1c3ps1yjuw%3D%3D Occurrence Handle9633153

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. ME Groher (1994) ArticleTitleEditorial: Determination of the risks and benefits of oral feeding. Dysphagia 9 233–235 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByqC3czpsVQ%3D Occurrence Handle7805422

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. P Drinka S Voeks (1993) ArticleTitleVideofluoroscopic swallowing studies (letter) J Am Geriatr Soc 41 1275 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByuD2cvjs1E%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. O Ekberg MJ Feinberg (1991) ArticleTitleAltered swallowing function in elderly patients without dysphagia: Radiologic findings in 56 cases. Am J Radiol 156 1181–1184 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By6B38fpt10%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. ME Groher (1994) ArticleTitleThe detection of aspiration and videofluoroscopy. Dysphagia 9 147–148 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByuA28zptlI%3D Occurrence Handle8082321

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. HC Lambert EG Gisel (1996) ArticleTitleAssessment of oral, pharyngeal and esophageal dysphagia in elderly persons. Phys Occup Ther Geriatr 14 IssueID4 1–25

    Google Scholar 

  14. InstitutionalAuthorNameAgency for Health Care Policy and Research (1999) Diagnosis and treatment of swallowing disorders (dysphagia) in acute-care strokepatients summary Rockville, MD 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  15. MJ Feinberg (1997) ArticleTitleEditorial: Swallowing versus eating impairment in nursing home residents. Dysphagia 12 51 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1MzjsVWrtw%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10405713

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. HC Lambert EG Gisel S Wood–Dauphinee (2001) ArticleTitleThe functional assessment of dysphagia: Psychometric standards. Phys Occup Ther Geriatr 19 IssueID3 @15

    Google Scholar 

  17. DJ Kenny RM Koheil J Greenberg D Reid M Milner R Moran PL Judd (1989) ArticleTitleDevelopment of a multidisciplinary feeding profile for children who are dependent feeders. Dysphagia 4 16–28 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By%2BA383otVI%3D Occurrence Handle2534818

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. LC Parrott WG Selley WA Brooks PC Lethbridge JJ Cole FC Flack RE Ellis JH Tripp (1992) ArticleTitleDysphagia in cerebral palsy: A comparative study of the Exeter Dysphagia Assessment Technique and a multidisciplinary assessment. Dysphagia 7 209–219 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByyD2cfitVU%3D Occurrence Handle1424834

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. S Reilly D Skuse B Mathisen D Wolke (1995) ArticleTitleThe objective rating of oral-motor functions during feeding. Dysphagia 10 177–191 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByqA3sbnsVQ%3D Occurrence Handle7614860

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. CM Steele C Greenwood I Ens C Robertson R Seidman–Carlson (1997) ArticleTitleMealtime difficulties in a home for the aged: Not just dysphagia. Dysphagia 12 43–50 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiC2M7ovVc%3D Occurrence Handle8997832

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. AY Chen R Frankowski J Bishop–Leone T Hebert S Leyk J Lewin H Goepfert (2001) ArticleTitleThe development and validation of a dysphagia-specific quality-of-life questionnaire for patients with head and neck cancer: The M.D. Anderson Dysphagia Inventory. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 127 870–876 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MvjvVGjtg%3D%3D Occurrence Handle11448365

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. CA McHorney DE Bricker AE Kramer JC Rosenbek J Robbins KA Chignell JA Logemann C Clarke (2000) ArticleTitleThe SWAL-QOL outcomes tool for oropharyngeal dysphagia in adults: I. Conceptual foundation and item development. Dysphagia 15 115–121 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3czpsVKmsg%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10839823

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. CA McHorney DE Bricker J Robbins AE Kramer JC Rosenbek KA Chignell (2000) ArticleTitleThe SWAL-QOL outcomes tool for oropharyngeal dysphagia in adults: II. Item reduction and preliminary scaling. Dysphagia 15 122–133 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3czpsVKmsw%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10839824

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. CA McHorney J Robbins K Lomax JC Rosenbek K Chignell AE Kramer DE Bricker (2002) ArticleTitleThe SWAL-QOL and SWAL-CARE outcomes tool for oropharyngeal dysphagia in adults: III. Documentation of reliability and validity. Dysphagia 17 97–114 Occurrence Handle11956835

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. JA Robbins J Coyle J Rosenbek E Roecker J Wood (1999) ArticleTitleDifferentiation of normal and abnormal airway protection during swallowing using the Penetration–Aspiration Scale. Dysphagia 14 228–232 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1Mzps1Kruw%3D%3D Occurrence Handle10467048

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. JC Rosenbek J Robbins EB Roecker JL Coyle JL Wood (1996) ArticleTitleA penetration–aspiration scale. Dysphagia 11 93–98 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BymA3sbgt1U%3D Occurrence Handle8721066

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. InstitutionalAuthorNameWHO North American Collaborating Center (1998) ICIDH-2 Beta-1 field trial results. Canadian Institute for Health Information Ottawa, Canada 1–19

    Google Scholar 

  28. M Chamie (1990) ArticleTitleThe status and use of the International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps (ICIDH). World Health Stat Q 43 273–280 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By6C2MjksFc%3D Occurrence Handle2149896

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. S Fucile P Wright I Chan S Yee M-E Langlais EG Gisel (1998) ArticleTitleFunctional oral-motor skills: Do they change with age? Dysphagia 13 195–201 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1czosVaqug%3D%3D Occurrence Handle9716749

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. JC Nunnally IH Bernstein (1994) Psychometric theory. McGraw–Hill New York

    Google Scholar 

  31. LG Portney MP Watkins (1993) Validity of measurements. CT Norwalk (Eds) Foundations of clinical research: Applications to practice. Appleton & Lange Norwalk, CT 69–86

    Google Scholar 

  32. J Curran ME Groher (1990) ArticleTitleDevelopment and dissemination of an aspiration risk reduction diet. Dysphagia 5 6–12 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By%2BA28%2FmsVA%3D Occurrence Handle2202558

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. RF DeVellis (1991) Guidelines in scale development. Scale development: Theory and application. Sage Publishers London 51–90

    Google Scholar 

  34. DL Streiner GR Norman (1995) Health measurement scales. Oxford University Press Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  35. JG Wright AR Feinstein (1992) ArticleTitleA comparative contrast of clinimetric and psychometric methods for constructing indexes and rating scales. J Clin Epidemiol 45 1201–1218 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByyD2MjmsFQ%3D Occurrence Handle1432001

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. S Ferketich (1991) ArticleTitleFocus on psychometrics. Aspects of item analysis. Res Nurs Health 14 165–168 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By6B283htFA%3D Occurrence Handle2047538

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. DJ Ott VN Peele YM Chen DW Gelfand (1990) ArticleTitleOropharyngeal function study: Radiologic means of evaluating swallowing difficulty. South Med J 83 191–193 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:By%2BC283gslM%3D Occurrence Handle2305300

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. ML Splaingard B Hutchins LD Sulton G Chaudhuri (1988) ArticleTitleAspiration in rehabilitation patients: videofluoroscopy vs. bedside clinical assessment. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 69 637–640 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:BieA3cfmvFQ%3D Occurrence Handle3408337

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. AL Perlman C Lu B Jones (1997) Radiographic contrast examination of the mouth, pharynx and esophagus. AL Perlman KS Schulze–Delrieu (Eds) Deglutition and its disorders: Anatomy, physiology, clinical diagnosis and management. Singular Publishing Group San Diego, CA 153–200

    Google Scholar 

  40. KS Schulze–Delrieu RM Miller (1997) Clinical assessment of dysphagia. AL Perlman KS Schulze–Delrieu (Eds) Deglutition and its disorders: Anatomy, physiology, clinical diagnosis and management. Singular Publishing Group San Diego, CA 125–152

    Google Scholar 

  41. EG Gisel R Birnbaum S Schwartz (1998) ArticleTitleHelping the feeding impaired child. Recent Adv Paediatr 16 59–72

    Google Scholar 

  42. P Bech (1999) Methodological issues in individual quality of life assessment. CRB Joyce HM McGee CA O'Boyle (Eds) Individual quality of life: Approaches to conceptualisation and assessment. Amsterdam Harwood Academic Publishers 51–64

    Google Scholar 

  43. A Fink (1995) How to ask survey questions. SAGE Publications Thousand Oaks, CA

    Google Scholar 

  44. LW Green FR Lewis (1986) Measurement and evaluation in health education and health promotion. Mayfield Publishing Company Palo Alto, CA

    Google Scholar 

  45. J Dekker (1995) ArticleTitleApplication of the ICIDH in survey research on rehabilitation: The emergence of the functional diagnosis. Disabil Rehabil 17 195–201 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByqA3cnotV0%3D Occurrence Handle7787203

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. RA Keith (1994) ArticleTitleFunctional status and health status. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 75 478–483 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByuB38nltVw%3D Occurrence Handle8172511

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. L Roberts C Counsell (1998) ArticleTitleAssessment of clinical outcomes in acute stroke trials. Stroke 29 986–991 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1c3lsFKrtA%3D%3D Occurrence Handle9596247

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. AC McFarlane PM Brooks (1997) ArticleTitleThe assessment of disability and handicap in musculoskeletal disease. J Rheumatol 24 985–949 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByiB1MvitFY%3D Occurrence Handle9150096

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. RA Keith (1995) ArticleTitleConceptual basis of outcome measures. Am J Phys Rehabil 74 73–80 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:ByqC2sfgtVY%3D

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. RM Miller ME Groher (1997) General treatment of neurologic swallowing disorders, ME Groher (Eds) Dysphagia: Diagnosis and management. Butterworth-Heinemann Boston 223–244

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of Dr. M. Abrahamowicz in the development of the project, data analysis, and in the preparation of this manuscript. This study was funded in part by a Health Canada NHRDP Fellowship, a REPAR Fellowship, a doctoral bursary from the Fonds de la Recherche en Santé du Quebec, and a Canadian Occupational Therapy Foundation–Royal Canadian Legion Fellowship in Gerontology to H.L.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Heather C. Lambert erg., PhD, OT(C).

Appendices

Definition of Scales and Sample Items

Abstracted from the McGill Ingestive Skills Assessment User's Manual, Draft Version 2.

For ease of reading, the following text uses the male gender to refer to male or female patients.

Positioning

The purpose of the Positioning Scale is to assess the patient's ability to maintain a position that is safe for feeding. The observer should not alter the patient's position during the meal; this task should be left to the regular caregiver or the patient himself.

Maintains Symmetry of Posture

For this item, observe whether or not the patient leans to the right or the left during the meal.

  1. 1

    Score 1 if the patient spends all or nearly all of the time leaning to one side and does not straighten himself even when he is taking a new mouthful or when he is are swallowing.

  2. 2

    Score 2 if the patient spends more than half of the meal leaning to one side. The patient may lean from time to time and then reposition or may lose his position after a few minutes of the meal and does not regain a symmetric posture.

  3. 3

    Score 3 if the patient spends about less than half of the meal leaning to one side. The patient may lean from time to time and then reposition or may lose his position partway through the meal and does not regain a symmetric posture.

  4. 4

    Score 4 if the patient is able to maintain a symmetrical posture or if he adopts an asymmetric position only transitionally. The patient should be symmetric when taking a mouthful or swallowing. If he is not, score 2 or 3 as appropriate. Some individuals habitually shift their weight from side to side; if they come back to the centre, score 4.

Has Adequate Head Control for Feeding

For this item, observe the patient's ability to hold his head in a neutral position. During eating, the neck should not be extended or flexed more than a few degrees, so that the chin is tucked in.

  1. 1

    Score 1 if the patient requires a head support to prevent loss of position or if he is never able to hold his head in a stable position.

  2. 2

    Score 2 if the patient is able to bring his head into a neutral position and maintain it for a few seconds but does not have head control for the majority of the meal.

  3. 3

    Score 3 if the patient is able to maintain his head position for the majority of the meal duration but has occasional loss of control, allowing his neck to flex or extend.

  4. 4

    Score 4 if the patient is able to maintain his head position throughout the meal. Some individuals may voluntarily look around the room or voluntarily flex or extend to relax stiffness; these individuals should also be scored 4 if these movements are voluntary. If there are involuntary movements in addition to these, score 2 or 3 as appropriate.

Texture Management

The purpose of the Texture Management Scale is to assess the individual's ability to accept food textures. The purpose is not to assess the safety of the consumption of these textures; that aspect is addressed later. In this scale, we are assessing the individual's judgment, discretion, and sensitivity to different textures.

Each of the items is prefaced by the word accepts. This word is to be interpreted as the willing consumption of the texture described. If an individual does not accept the food, he may turn away or refuse to open the mouth. Some individuals realize that they are unable to handle a texture only when it is in the mouth. If an individual spits out a food, appears anxious, cries, or otherwise demonstrates hesitancy or resistance to swallowing, this should be interpreted as not accepting the texture. Some individuals may take a mouthful and then refuse to eat any more; this should be interpreted as nonacceptance unless the patient makes a statement that he dislikes the taste of the food.

Feeding Skills

The purpose of this scale is to assess the individual's ability to manage the meal activity independently and functionally. The scale touches on various aspects of meals, including preparation, self-feeding, behavior, judgment, and appetite.

Sets Up Tray Independently

This item is concerned with the patient's ability to arrange platters appropriately on the tray or table, open wrappers, remove lids, and prepare utensils.

  1. 1

    Score 1 if the patient requires someone else to carry out all or part of these tasks.

  2. 2

    Score 2 if the patient is able to carry out the tasks independently if he is given precise verbal instructions (“pick up the crackers, hold the plastic in each hand, and pull”) or if he is given a physical demonstration without the helper doing the task for him.

  3. 3

    Score 3 if the patient needs only a verbal prompt (“the butter for your bread is on the tray”).

  4. 4

    Score 4 if the patient is able to complete all tasks without assistance or prompting.

Able to Grasp Utensil Functionally

For this item, observe how the patient holds the utensil. The style of grasp is not important. Rather, the utensil should be held in such a way as to prevent spillage of the food before the utensil reaches the mouth.

  1. 1

    Score 1 if the patient is fed by an assistant or if he almost never grasps the utensil functionally.

  2. 2

    Score 2 if the patient self feeds and grasps the utensil functionally for less than half of the meal.

  3. 3

    Score 3 if the patient self feeds and holds the utensil functionally for more than half of the meal.

  4. 4

    Score 4 if the patient always uses a functional grasp.

Liquid Ingestion

The purpose of this scale is to assess the patient's ability to consume regular and thickened liquids. The scale should be scored whether the patient takes the liquid from a glass, cup, or spoon. The scale addresses the various motor functions associated with drinking and the observable signs of pharyngeal function and airway protection.

Seals Lips on Cup

This item addresses the patient's ability to close his lips on the cup when he drinks. Observe the closure of the lips with particular attention to the bottom lip. The glass or cup should rest on the bottom lip during drinking, and the upper lip should close towards the inside of the glass. Some individuals do not completely oppose the upper lip to the surface of the cup; this is considered normal.

  1. 1

    Score 1 if the patient almost never closes his lips on the cup. This may be seen by stabilization of the glass on the lower teeth and/or a lax lower lip. Score 2 if the patient takes liquids from a spoon.

  2. 2

    Score 2 if the patient closes his lips on the cup less than half of the time. He may stop closing his lips partway through the meal or close them only on occasion throughout the meal.

  3. 3

    Score 3 if the patient closes his lips on the cup more than half of the time. He may stop closing his lips partway through the meal or close them only on occasion throughout the meal.

  4. 4

    Score 4 if the patient closes his lips consistently for the entire meal.

Demonstrates Same Voice Quality After Drinking

This item assesses the patient's ability to protect the airway from penetration of liquid. The presence of aspiration and penetration is associated with a change in the patient's voice. A hoarse voice generally becomes deeper and takes on a rough quality. A gurgly voice can be described as sounding “well,” as if there is liquid on the vocal cords. The patient should be observed throughout the meal to determine if this phenomenon appears with fatigue.

  1. 1

    Score 1 if the patient loses his voice after drinking or if he is unable to verbalize at the outset of the meal. A loss of voice on one occasion without any other abnormalities is scored 1.

  2. 2

    Score 2 if the patient demonstrates a change in voice after drinking a small quantity of liquid or if this occurs near the beginning of the meal.

  3. 3

    Score 3 if the patient demonstrates a change in voice after drinking a large quantity of liquid or if this occurs near the end of the meal.

  4. 4

    Score 4 if there is never any change in voice after drinking.

Solid Ingestion

The purpose of this scale is to assess the patient's motor skills for eating, as well as to evaluate the observable signs of pharyngeal dysfunction. The patient should be observed as he consumes all foods of a solid texture, including purees and puddings.

Opens Mouth in Anticipation

This item assesses the patient's preparation to receive food. The patient should open his mouth to admit the utensil whether he is being fed or is self-feeding. The patient should open at the sight or smell of the food approaching, on a verbal cue from a feeder, or, in the case of individual with multiple sensory deficits, as the utensil is touched to the lower lip. Unless there is a physical limitation to the range of motion in the jaw, the mouth should open wide enough to allow the utensil to pass without stretching the corners of the mouth.

  1. 1

    Score 1 if the patient almost never opens his mouth in anticipation. If the patient needs to be coerced to open his mouth or consistently opens his mouth so little that the utensil cannot pass, score 1.

  2. 2

    Score 2 if the patient opens his mouth less than half of the time or opens his mouth widely enough only on occasion.

  3. 3

    Score 3 if the patient opens his mouth more than half of the time or only occasionally does not open widely enough for the utensil to pass.

  4. 4

    Score 4 if the patient consistently opens his mouth widely enough in anticipation.

Retains Food in Mouth

This item assesses the patient's ability to form a bolus and control the bolus in the mouth, as well as the ability of the lips to contain solid food. This should be scored based on the patient's performance throughout the processing of the bolus in preparation for the swallow.

  1. 1

    Score 1 if the patient loses any amount of food on a consistent basis or if there is occasional loss of large quantities of the bolus.

  2. 2

    Score 2 if the patient loses small amounts of food frequently. This may occur at intervals throughout the meal or begin to occur consistently as the patient becomes fatigued as the meal progresses.

  3. 3

    Score 3 if the patient loses small quantities on occasion, either periodically throughout the meal or consistently for a short period of time.

  4. 4

    Score 4 if the patient never loses food during oral processing.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lambert, H.C., Gisel, E.G., Groher, M.E. et al. McGill Ingestive Skills Assessment (MISA): Development and First Field Test of an Evaluation of Functional Ingestive Skills of Elderly Persons . Dysphagia 18, 101–113 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-002-0091-2

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-002-0091-2

Keywords

Navigation