The Association Between Dysphagia Symptoms, DIGEST Scores, and Severity Ratings in Individuals with Parkinson's Disease

Reliability and Confidence of Dynamic Imaging Grade of Swallowing Toxicity (DIGEST) Rating Among Research and Clinical Speech Pathologists Before and After Implementation of a Training Manual: A Multi-site Study

DIGEST is a validated, open-source method to grade the severity of pharyngeal dysphagia from the modified barium swallow (MBS) study. Dissemination and implementation of DIGEST is rising, making it critical to understand reliability and facilitators of accurate implementation among users. The aim was to assess reliability of the tool among speech-language pathology (SLP) raters practicing at multiple sites before and after review of a DIGEST training manual and evaluate confidence of DIGEST use pre-and post-training. Thirty-two SLPs from 5 sites participated in a blinded longitudinal DIGEST rating study. Raters were provided a standardized training set of MBS (n = 19). Initial SLP ratings (round 1, R1) were followed by a 2-4 week break before raters rated a re-keyed MBS set (round 2, R2). A minimum 4-8 week wash-out period then preceded self-study of the DIGEST training manual which was followed by a final rating (round 3, R3) and a post-manual survey afterwards. Baseline reliability (R1) of overall DIGEST was on average k = 0.70, reflecting agreement in the substantial range. Seventy-five percent of raters (24/32) demonstrated reliability ≥ 0.61 in the substantial to almost perfect range prior to training. Inter-rater reliability significantly improved from R1 to R3 after review of the DIGEST manual, with the largest change in DIGEST-Efficiency (mean change: DIGEST k = .04, p = .009, DIGEST-Safety k = .07, p = 0.03, and DIGEST-Efficiency k = .14, p = 0.009). Although DIGEST reliability at baseline was adequate in the majority of raters, self-study of the DIGEST training manual significantly improved inter-rater reliability and rater confidence using the DIGEST method, particularly when assigning DIGEST-Efficiency grade. These early data show promise that provider training may be useful to aid in fidelity of DIGEST implementation among SLP clinical users with varying DIGEST experience.

Validation of the DIGEST-FEES as a Global Outcome Measure for Pharyngeal Dysphagia in Parkinson's Disease

Flexible Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES) is one of two diagnostic gold standards for pharyngeal dysphagia in Parkinson's disease (PD), however, validated global outcome measures at the patient level are widely lacking. The Dynamic Imaging Grade of Swallowing Toxicity for Flexible Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (DIGEST-FEES) represents such an outcome measure but has been validated primarily for head and neck cancer collectives. The objective of this study was, therefore, to investigate the validity of the DIGEST-FEES in patients with PD. Content validity was evaluated with a modified Delphi expert survey. Subsequently, 66 FEES videos in PD patients were scored with the DIGEST-FEES. Criterion validity was determined using Spearman's correlation coefficient between the DIGEST-FEES and the Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS), the Yale-Residue-Rating-Scale, the Functional-Oral-Intake-Scale (FOIS), and the swallowing-related Unified-Parkinson-Disease-Rating-Scale (UPDRS) items. Inter-rater reliability was determined using 10 randomly selected FEES-videos examined by a second rater. As a result, the overall DIGEST-FEES-rating exhibited significant correlations with the Yale-Valleculae-Residue-Scale (r = 0.84; p < 0.001), the Yale-Pyriform-Sinus-Residue-Scale (r = 0.70; p < 0.001), the FOIS (r =  - 0.55, p < 0.001), and the UPDRS-Swallowing-Item-Score (r = 0.42, p < 0.001). Further, the DIGEST-FEES-safety subscore correlated with the PAS (r = 0.63, p < 0.001). Inter-rater reliability was high for the overall DIGEST-FEES rating (quadratic weighted kappa of 0.82). Therefore, DIGEST-FEES is a valid and reliable score to evaluate overall pharyngeal dysphagia severity in PD. Nevertheless, the modified Delphi survey identified domains where DIGEST-FEES may need to be specifically adapted to PD or neurological collectives in the future.

Self-Reported Voice and Swallow Questionnaires' Alignment with Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Questions: A Preliminary Study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this manuscript was twofold: to investigate how clinical voice and swallow questionnaires align with self-reports from speech/voice and swallow domains of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS), and how decline in self-reported speech/voice measures predict decline in self-reported swallowing measures.

METHODS

This observational, preliminary cross-sectional study included 15 people diagnosed with Idiopathic Parkinson's Disease. Participants completed the Voice Related Quality of Life (V-RQOL), Sydney Swallow Questionnaire (SSQ), and cognitive screening (Montreal Cognitive Assessment; MoCA) to account for cognitive impairment during self-reported speech/voice and swallow measures. They also completed the speech/voice and swallow components of the UPDRS.

RESULTS

There were significant associations between the SSQ and UPDRS question 2.3 (chewing/swallowing) (P < 0.001), but not between UPDRS question 2.1 (speech/voice) and V-RQOL. However, the MoCA was significantly and directionally associated with V-RQOL scores (P = 0.01). Finally, the V-RQOL was significantly associated with SSQ scores in a multiple regression model (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Speech/voice and swallow-related questions from the UPDRS may be viable initial screening tools to facilitate faster and earlier laryngeal function testing. Substantially more research should be undertaken to assess how well these UPDRS question domains are indicative of underlying speech/voice or swallow dysfunction.