Comparative Efficacy and Side Effect Profiles of Interventions for Pediatric Saliva Control: A Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare efficacy and side effect profile data on conservative, behavioral, pharmacological, and surgical treatments used for pediatric saliva control.

STUDY DESIGN

A cohort study of children (n = 483) referred to a specialty Saliva Control service between May 2014 and November 2019 was performed, using quantitative data from pretreatment and post-treatment questionnaires (the Drooling Impact Scale [DIS], Drooling Rating Scale [DRS]) and recording of side effects. Overall, 483 children were included; treatment choices were based on published international guidelines.

RESULTS

The greatest improvement was seen after intraglandular botulinum toxin A (BTX-A) injections (n = 207; 551 courses; mean DIS change, 34.7; 95% CI = 29.2-35.7) or duct transpositional surgery (n = 31; mean change in DIS, 29.0; 95% CI, 22.3-35.7). Oral anticholinergics were associated with good outcomes, with no significant statistical difference between glycopyrronium bromide (n = 150; mean DIS change, 21.5; 95% CI, 19.1-24.0) or trihexyphenidyl (n = 87; mean DIS change, 22.4; 95% CI, 18.9-25.8). Inhaled ipratropium bromide was not as efficacious (n = 80; mean DIS change, 11.1; 95% CI, 8.9-13.3). Oromotor programs were used in a selected group with reliable outcomes (n = 9; mean DIS change, 13.0). Side effects were consistent with previous studies. Overall, in cases of milder severity, enterally administered therapies provided a good first-line option. With more severe problems, BTX-A injections or saliva duct transpositional surgery were more effective and well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

We describe a large, single-center pediatric saliva control cohort, providing direct comparison of the efficacy and side effect profiles for all available interventions and inform clinical practice for specialists when considering different options. BTX-A injections or saliva duct transpositional surgery seem to be more effective for saliva control that is more severe.

Development of an International SMA Bulbar Assessment for Inter-professional Administration

BACKGROUND

Progressive weakness can affect bulbar muscles in individuals with moderate to severe forms of spinal muscular atrophy (SMA). The paucity of standardized, valid bulbar assessments capturing clinically significant deficits in SMA impedes the ability to monitor function, facilitate intervention, or detect treatment response.

OBJECTIVE

To fill this void, an international multidisciplinary team gathered to develop an agreed upon consensus-derived assessment of bulbar function in SMA for inter-professional administration to enhance our ability to monitor disease progression, support clinical management, and evaluate treatment effects.

METHODS

Fifty-six international clinicians experienced in SMA were invited and engaged using the Delphi method over multiple rounds of web-based surveys to establish consensus.

RESULTS

Serial virtual meetings occurred with 42 clinicians (21 speech and language therapists, 11 physical therapists, 5 neurologists, 4 occupational therapists, and 1 dentist). Seventy-two validated assessments of bulbar function were identified for potential relevance to individuals with SMA (32 accessible objective, 11 inaccessible objective, 29 patient-reported outcomes). Delphi survey rounds (n = 11, 15, 15) achieved consensus on individual items with relevance and wording discussed. Key aspects of bulbar function identified included: oral intake status, oral facial structure and motor strength, swallowing physiology, voice & speech, and fatigability.

CONCLUSIONS

Multidisciplinary clinicians with expertise in bulbar function and SMA used Delphi methodology to reach consensus on assessments/items considered relevant for SMA across all age groups. Future steps include piloting the new scale moving towards validation/reliability. This work supports the advancement of assessing bulbar function in children and adults with SMA by a variety of professionals.

Research priorities to improve the health of children and adults with dysphagia: a National Institute of Health Research and Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists research priority setting partnership

OBJECTIVE

To conduct the first UK-wide research priority setting project informing researchers and funders of critical knowledge gaps requiring investigation to improve the health and well-being of patients with eating, drinking and swallowing disorders (dysphagia) and their carers.

DESIGN

A priority setting partnership between the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) and the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists using a modified nominal group technique. A steering group and NIHR representatives oversaw four project phases: (1) survey gathering research suggestions, (2) verification and aggregation of suggestions with systematic review research recommendations, (3) multistakeholder workshop to develop research questions, (4) interim priority setting via an online ranking survey and (5) final priority setting.

SETTING

UK health services and community.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with dysphagia, carers and professionals who work with children and adults with dysphagia from the UK.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-six speech and language therapists submitted 332 research suggestions related to dysphagia. These were mapped to 88 research recommendations from systematic reviews to form 24 'uncertainty topics' (knowledge gaps that are answerable by research). Four patients, 1 carer and 30 healthcare professionals collaboratively produced 77 research questions in relation to these topics. Thereafter, 387 patients, carers and professionals with experience of dysphagia prioritised 10 research questions using an interim prioritisation survey. Votes and feedback for each question were collated and reviewed by the steering and dysphagia reference groups. Nine further questions were added to the long-list and top 10 lists of priority questions were agreed.

CONCLUSION

Three top 10 lists of topics grouped as adults, neonates and children, and all ages, and a further long list of questions were identified by patients, carers and healthcare professionals as research priorities to improve the lives of those with dysphagia.