Psychometric evaluation of the Swallowing Outcomes After Laryngectomy (SOAL) patient‐reported outcome measure

Govender, Roganie; Lee, Mary T.; Drinnan, Michael; Davies, T.C.; Twinn, Claire; Hilari, Katerina

doi:10.1002/hed.24291

Cited by 15 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, both the Swallowing Outcomes After Laryngectomy questionnaire (SOAL) and Measure of Achalasia Disease Severity (MADS) scores are deemed invalid if there are missing item responses. 18, 36, 46 In the Sydney Symptom Inventory for Oropharyngeal Dysphagia Questionnaire (SSQ), surveys are discarded if 15 of 19 questions are not completed. 29 In contrast, the Quality of Life and Esophageal Cancer questionnaire (QL-Eso-Ca) provides a more detailed algorithm for missing responses.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient-reported outcome measures in dysphagia: a systematic review of instrument development and validation

Patel¹,

Sharda²,

Hovis

et al. 2017

Diseases of the Esophagus

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are commonly used to capture patient experience with dysphagia and to evaluate treatment effectiveness. Inappropriate application can lead to distorted results in clinical studies. A systematic review of the literature on dysphagia-related PRO measures was performed to 1) identify all currently available measures and 2) to evaluate each for the presence of important measurement properties that would affect their applicability. Design MEDLINE via the PubMed interface, the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Health and Psychosocial Instrument database were searched using relevant vocabulary terms and key terms related to PRO measures and dysphagia. Three independent investigators performed abstract and full text reviews. Each study meeting criteria was evaluated using an 18-item checklist developed a priori that assessed multiple domains: 1) conceptual model, 2) content validity, 3) reliability, 4) construct validity, 6) scoring and interpretation, and 7) burden and presentation. Results Of 4950 abstracts reviewed, a total of 34 dysphagia-related PRO measures (publication year 1987 – 2014) met criteria for extraction and analysis. Several PRO measures were of high quality (MADS for achalasia, SWAL-QOL and SSQ for oropharyngeal dysphagia, PROMIS-GI for general dysphagia, EORTC-QLQ-OG25 for esophageal cancer, ROMP-swallowing for Parkinson’s disease, DSQ-EoE for eosinophilic esophagitis, and SOAL for total laryngectomy-related dysphagia). In all, 17 met at least one criterion per domain. Thematic deficiencies in current measures were evident including: 1) direct patient involvement in content development, 2) empirically justified dimensionality, 3) demonstrable responsiveness to change, 4) plan for interpreting missing responses, and 5) literacy level assessment. Conclusion This is the first comprehensive systematic review assessing developmental properties of all available dysphagia-related PRO measures. We identified several instruments with robust measurement properties in multiple diseases including achalasia, oropharyngeal dysphagia, post-surgical dysphagia, esophageal cancer, and dysphagia related to neurological diseases. Findings herein can assist clinicians and researchers in making more informed decisions in selecting the most fundamentally sound PRO measure for a given clinical, research, or quality initiative.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient-reported outcome measures in dysphagia: a systematic review of instrument development and validation

Patel¹,

Sharda²,

Hovis

et al. 2017

Diseases of the Esophagus

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Swallowing impairment should also be evaluated from the patients' perspective using self-report OD questionnaires. The Swallowing Outcome After Laryngectomy questionnaire (SOAL) has been validated specifically for patients without a larynx [432,433]. Such questionnaires may be a useful way of monitoring swallowing and signposting the clinician toward the need for further diagnostic swallowing assessments.…”

Section: Oropharyngeal Dysphagia Following Total Laryngectomymentioning

confidence: 99%

European white paper: oropharyngeal dysphagia in head and neck cancer

Baijens

Walshe

Aaltonen

et al. 2020

Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol

Self Cite

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To develop a European White Paper document on oropharyngeal dysphagia (OD) in head and neck cancer (HNC). There are wide variations in the management of OD associated with HNC across Europe. Methods Experts in the management of specific aspects of OD in HNC across Europe were delegated by their professional medical and multidisciplinary societies to contribute to this document. Evidence is based on systematic reviews, consensus-based position statements, and expert opinion. Results Twenty-four sections on HNC-specific OD topics. Conclusion This European White Paper summarizes current best practice on management of OD in HNC, providing recommendations to support patients and health professionals. The body of literature and its level of evidence on diagnostics and treatment for OD in HNC remain poor. This is in the context of an expected increase in the prevalence of OD due to HNC in the near future. Contributing factors to increased prevalence include aging of our European population (including HNC patients) and an increase in human papillomavirus (HPV) related cancer, despite the introduction of HPV vaccination in various countries. We recommend timely implementation of OD screening in HNC patients while emphasizing the need for robust scientific research on the treatment of OD in HNC. Meanwhile, its management remains a challenge for European professional associations and policymakers.

show abstract

“…To test the appropriateness of the SDS, we compared its outcomes with those of the swallowing outcome after laryngectomy (SOAL) questionnaire, an established measurement tool developed and preliminarily validated in 2012, [10] followed by full psychometric validation in 2015. [12] The SOAL was identified from the literature as being methodologically robust and the only questionnaire specifically developed to assess swallowing after TL. While impractical as a routine screening tool in our busy clinics, it did present a good exemplar against which to measure the validity of the developed SDS.…”

Section: Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Post-laryngectomy simplified dysphagia score (SDS) tool: Potential for screening and comparison with the swallowing outcomes after laryngectomy (SOAL) tool

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychometric evaluation of the Swallowing Outcomes After Laryngectomy (SOAL) patient‐reported outcome measure

Cited by 15 publications

References 24 publications

Patient-reported outcome measures in dysphagia: a systematic review of instrument development and validation

Patient-reported outcome measures in dysphagia: a systematic review of instrument development and validation

European white paper: oropharyngeal dysphagia in head and neck cancer

Post-laryngectomy simplified dysphagia score (SDS) tool: Potential for screening and comparison with the swallowing outcomes after laryngectomy (SOAL) tool

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About