Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a chronic inflammatory condition of the esophagus that affects both children and adults. Symptoms in adults are mainly esophageal dysphagia, which ranges from mild symptoms to acute food bolus obstruction of the esophagus. Diagnosis is defined as symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and ≥ 15 eosinophils/high power field (HPF) in at least one of the biopsies taken from the esophagus. EoE appears to be increasing in both prevalence and incidence. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence, incidence, and presenting symptoms of patients with EoE within the catchment area of Northern Älvsborg County Hospital in Trollhättan. Patient records with the ICD code of EoE between 2012 and 2022 and pathology reports from esophageal biopsies from 2000-2022 were examined. Patients with symptoms of esophageal dysfunction and > 15 eosinophils/HPF were classified as having EoE. In total, 409 EoE patients (379 adults and 30 children) fulfilled the diagnostic criteria during the follow-up period. The overall prevalence was 113 cases/100 000 inhabitants (adults 127/100 000 and children 57/100 000) at 31 December 2022. The incidence was 7/100 000 and increased during the observation period. At diagnosis, 46% of the adults and 11% of the children had a history of acute bolus obstruction requiring hospitalization, while 51% of adults and 22% of children exhibited endoscopic findings of fibrosis. The prevalence of EoE is significantly higher than that generally reported in an area of southwest Sweden. The results indicate that the incidence is increasing; however, whether this is due to an actual increase or heightened awareness of EoE is inconclusive. Acute bolus obstruction is a common presenting symptom among EoE patients and is most likely an effect of late diagnosis.

Successful dysphagia management requires accurate, succinct diagnosis and characterization of swallowing safety impairments. However, the Penetration-Aspiration Scale (PAS) remains the only available tool developed exclusively for assessment of airway protection. To best support efforts to advance the field\'s understanding of swallowing safety, it is crucial to understand current clinician practice patterns, perceptions, and accuracy regarding the PAS. A 46-item survey was developed and distributed to deglutologists internationally examining: (1) Demographics; (2) Scale Practices; (3) Swallowing Safety Priorities; (4) Scale Perceptions; and (5) Accuracy. The first four sections consisted of questionnaires. In the optional fifth section, respondents were asked to score five videos of swallows collected via videofluoroscopy and previously PAS-scored by two trained raters. In total, 335 responses were analyzed. The majority of respondents self-reported PAS training (84%); 90% of untrained respondents were receptive to training. Respondents reported using the PAS \"always\" (40%) or \"frequently\" (29%), and that the PAS carries \"a great deal of\" weight in assessment (40%). Reported application of the PAS was heterogeneous, with the most common approach being \"single worst score per unique presentation\" (45%). Most respondents (64%) prioritized a parameter not captured by the PAS. Untrained respondents were significantly more confident with PAS ratings than trained respondents (X2 = 7.47; p = 0.006). Of 1460 PAS ratings provided, 364 of them were accurate (25%) when compared to ratings by trained lab members. Results of this survey reflect ubiquitous use of the PAS, unmet needs for assessment of swallowing safety, low accuracy despite generally high confidence, and heterogenous training that does not correspond to confidence. This emphasizes the need for additional training in clinical application of the PAS as well as development of novel metrics to optimize assessments of swallowing safety.

Background and Objectives: Patients recovering from mild coronavirus disease (COVID-19) reportedly have dysphagia or difficulty in swallowing. We compared the prevalence of dysphagia between patients diagnosed with mild COVID-19 and those diagnosed with aspiration pneumonia alone. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was conducted from January 2020 to June 2023 in 160 patients referred for a videofluoroscopic swallowing study (VFSS) to assess for dysphagia. The cohort included 24 patients with mild COVID-19 and aspiration pneumonia, 30 with mild COVID-19 without aspiration pneumonia, and 106 with aspiration pneumonia alone. We reviewed the demographic data, comorbidities, and VFSS results using the penetration-aspiration scale (PAS) and functional dysphagia scale (FDS). Results: In a study comparing patients with mild COVID-19 (Group A) and those with aspiration pneumonia alone (Group B), no significant differences were observed in the baseline characteristics, including the prevalence of dysphagia-related comorbidities between the groups. Group A showed milder dysphagia, as evidenced by lower PAS and FDS scores, shorter oral and pharyngeal transit times (p = 0.001 and p = 0.003, respectively), and fewer residues in the vallecula and pyriform sinuses (p < 0.001 and p < 0.03, respectively). When Group A was subdivided into those with COVID-19 with (Group A1) and without aspiration pneumonia (Group A2), both subgroups outperformed Group B in terms of specific VFSS metrics, such as oral transit time (p = 0.01), pharyngeal transit time (p = 0.04 and p = 0.02, respectively), and residue in the vallecula (p = 0.04 and p = 0.02, respectively). However, Group B showed improved triggering of the pharyngeal swallowing reflex compared with Group A2 (p = 0.02). Conclusion: Mild COVID-19 patients showed less severe dysphagia than those with aspiration pneumonia alone. This finding was consistent across VFSS parameters, even when the COVID-19 group was subdivided based on the status of aspiration pneumonia.

To date, no consensus exists on the complex clinical decision-making processes involved in oropharyngeal dysphagia, or swallowing disorders. This study aimed to develop an international consensus on a clinical decision tree for the disease trajectory of oropharyngeal dysphagia in adults, taking into account physiological impairments of swallowing, risk factors for the development of complications from oropharyngeal dysphagia, and prognostic factors for treatment outcomes. Using the Delphi technique, consensus was achieved among dysphagia experts across 31 countries, resulting in a total of 10 physiological impairments, 23 risk factors and 21 prognostic factors identified as relevant factors in the clinical decision-making process. Factors most contributing to the severity of oropharyngeal dysphagia were \'Aspiration\', \'Incomplete ejection or failure to eject aspirated materials from the airways\', \'Weak or absent cough\', \'Choking\' and \'Sensory deficits in the oropharynx\'. To connect the existing theoretical framework to clinical practice, future research will develop the current findings by corroborating the domains based on relevant factors for clinical decision making and those that contribute to the severity of oropharyngeal dysphagia.

Visuoperceptual evaluation of fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) is a commonly used assessment in dysphagia or swallowing disorders. Currently, no international consensus exists regarding which visuoperceptual measures to use for the analysis of FEES recordings. Moreover, existing visuoperceptual FEES measures are limited by poor and incomplete psychometric data, identifying an urgent need for developing a visuoperceptual measure to interpret FEES recordings. Following the COSMIN group\'s (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) psychometric taxonomy and guidelines, this study aimed to establish the content validity of a new visuoperceptual FEES (V-FEES) measure in adults with oropharyngeal dysphagia. Using the Delphi technique, international consensus was achieved among dysphagia experts across 21 countries, resulting in a new prototype measure for V-FEES, comprising 30 items, 8 function testing items (i.e., specific tasks performed by patients while observing and rating items), and 36 unique operationalisations (i.e., defining items into measurable factors that could be measured empirically using visuoperceptual observation). This study supports good content validity for V-FEES, including participants\' feedback on the relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility of the included items. Future studies will continue the instrument development process and determine the remaining psychometric properties using both the classic test theory (CTT) and item response theory (IRT) models.

This investigation assessed the effect of side-lying position on infant oropharyngeal swallow physiology. Infant modified barium swallow studies (MBS) recordings were retrospectively examined in matched-pairs comparing at-risk infants swallowing in both an upright/cradled position and a side-lying position. Swallow parameters were measured independently and through a consensus coding approach. Infants fed in side-lying position showed a decrease in airway invasion severity as compared with when those same infants were fed in an upright/cradled position (P = .009). Bolus location at the time of swallow initiation was higher when infants were fed in side-lying position as compared with cradle position (P = .024), representing decreased risk of airway invasion. Infants fed in side-lying position demonstrated fewer swallows per breaths (P = .032). This pilot study validates the need for additional research to further define the mechanisms related to this improvement, and to determine how diagnosis and medical stability moderate these findings.

OBJECTIVE: Dysphagia is a common symptom in patients with Parkinson\'s disease (PD), though it may go undiagnosed until severe complications arise. Dysphagia can be suspected on a clinical basis, but an instrumental assessment is mandatory to confirm its presence and evaluate pathophysiological aspects and severity of the swallowing impairment. Aim of this review is to inform the clinician and the radiologist on the importance and the main radiological findings of the Video-Fluoroscopic-Swallow-Study (VFSS) in patients with PD starting from the most recent literature data on the topic.
METHODS: Databases analysis identified 98 papers (January 2000/October 2022) of which 55 were excluded after reading title, abstract and full-text. After evaluation of the selected articles and their references 7 additional papers were added.
RESULTS: Fifty papers were reviewed to answer the following four main questions: Should VFSS be routinely used to screen dysphagia? Compared to other diagnostic tools, what is the role of VFSS in PD patients with suspected dysphagia? What are the main VFSS findings and technical expedients ? What is the role of VFSS in the choice of the best treatment strategy ?
CONCLUSIONS: VFSS represents a gold standard technique in the diagnostic evaluation of dysphagia in PD, having a fundamental role in the identification of patients with high risk of aspiration pneumonia and also being extremely helpful to guide to the choice of treatment strategies for dysphagia.

BACKGROUND: The phenotype of patients affected by COVID-19 disease changed between the waves of the pandemic. We assessed the prevalence of oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD), malnutrition (MN), and mortality between the first three waves of COVID-19 patients in a general hospital.
METHODS: a prospective observational study between April 2020-May 2021. Clinical assessment for OD was made with the volume-viscosity swallowing test; nutritional assessment was performed consistent with GLIM criteria. A multimodal intervention was implemented in the second and third wave, including (a) texturized diets-fork mashable (1900 kcal + 90 g protein) or pureed (1700 kcal + 75 g protein), (b) oral nutritional supplements (500-600 kcal + 25-30 g protein), and (c) fluid thickening (250 mPa·s or 800 mPa·s).
RESULTS: We included 205 patients (69.3 ± 17.6 years) in the 1st, 200 (66.4 ± 17.5 years) in the 2nd, and 200 (72.0 ± 16.3 years;) in the 3rd wave (p = 0.004). On admission, prevalence of OD was 51.7%, 31.3% and 35.1%, and MN, 45.9%, 36.8% and 34.7%, respectively; mortality was 10.7%, 13.6% and 19.1%. OD was independently associated with age, delirium, and MN; MN, with age, OD, diarrhea and ICU admission; mortality, with age, OD and MN. (4) Conclusions: Prevalence of OD, MN and mortality was very high among COVID-19 patients. OD was independently associated with MN and mortality. An early and proactive multimodal nutritional intervention improved patients\' nutritional status.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the swallowing problems by fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) study in both short- and long-gap patients after esophageal atresia (EA) repair.
METHODS: Hospital records of patients who had undergone surgery for EA were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups as short-gap (SG) group (n:16) and long-gap (LG) group (n:10) to compare the swallowing problems. FEES study was performed, and the results were discussed in detail.
RESULTS: There were twenty-six (16 M/10 F) patients with a mean age at evaluation was 7.52 ∓ 3.68 years. Mean follow-up period was 75.35 ∓ 44.48 months. In FEES study, pharyngeal phase abnormalities were detected in 10 patients (38.4%). Pharyngeal phase abnormalities were detected significantly higher in LG group (p:0.015). Laryngeal penetration/aspiration was seen in four patients on FEES study (15.3%). All of them was in LG group (40%). Laryngeal penetration/aspiration was seen significantly higher in LG group (p:0.014).
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to conduct FEES study in children after esophageal atresia repair to evaluate their swallowing conditions. Even though our sample is small, swallowing problems are more common than expected in the cases of LG when compared to SG.

UNASSIGNED: In the absence of literature allowing for an evidence-based approach to therapeutic patient education (TPE) in Oropharyngeal Dysphagia (OD), this study aims to reach a consensus of experts on the content of a competency framework of an educational program for OD patients and their informal caregivers (ICGs).
UNASSIGNED: We used the Delphi consensus-building method. Four categories of experts were recruited: 12 patients, 17 ICGs, 46 healthcare professionals (HCP) (experienced in OD, not necessarily certified in TPE), and 19 experts in TPE (trained individuals to set up and run TPE programs not necessarily HCPs). The content of the questionnaire of the first round (R) was established according to the result of a scoping review and the opinion of an expert committee. We carried out three rounds. In R1 and R2, we collected the opinions on the relevance (7-point Likert-type scale) and on comprehensiveness (YES/No question and asking participants to propose additional content). Participants were also invited to leave comments on each objective. In R3, we asked the participants to give their opinion about the relevance of the objectives again and asked them to rank the themes from highest to lowest priority.
UNASSIGNED: Objectives were considered relevant for all participants if they reached consensus when the interquartile (IQR) ≤ 1, and if the median indicated agreement (Mdn ≥ 6) (6= appropriate, 7 = totally appropriate). Following three rounds, the final content of the educational program is composed of 23 educational objectives organized in 13 themes with an agreement about relevance amongst all participants (Mdn ≥ 6; IQR ≤ 1). The comprehensiveness criterion received also a consensus (IQR ≤ 1). The participants ranked the theme \"normal swallowing vs difficulty swallowing\" as the highest priority.
UNASSIGNED: This Delphi study resulted in a consensus, on the content of a competency framework of an educational program for OD patients and their ICGs. Further steps are needed to construct learning activities based on these objectives before testing their feasibility and efficacy.