Loading…

Development and validation of an electronic version of Sydney Swallow Questionnaire

Background and Aims Accurate assessment of patient‐reported oropharyngeal dysphagia (OPD) is essential to guide appropriate management and evaluate response. The Sydney Swallow Questionnaire (SSQ) is a paper‐based 17‐item inventory developed and validated to objectively detect risk of OPD. An easy‐t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Neurogastroenterology and motility 2024-05, Vol.36 (5), p.e14766-n/a
Main Authors: Huang, Dazhong, Schar, Mistyka, Wu, Peter I., Maclean, Julia, Pandey, Dheeraj, Cock, Charles, Omari, Taher, Szczesniak, Michal M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3136-4bac17b7b797d6d9a5c06d83789aeb8a545316e40eed4947a66a043ed208670a3
container_end_page n/a
container_issue 5
container_start_page e14766
container_title Neurogastroenterology and motility
container_volume 36
creator Huang, Dazhong
Schar, Mistyka
Wu, Peter I.
Maclean, Julia
Pandey, Dheeraj
Cock, Charles
Omari, Taher
Szczesniak, Michal M.
description Background and Aims Accurate assessment of patient‐reported oropharyngeal dysphagia (OPD) is essential to guide appropriate management and evaluate response. The Sydney Swallow Questionnaire (SSQ) is a paper‐based 17‐item inventory developed and validated to objectively detect risk of OPD. An easy‐to‐use electronic version with digital output has significant potential in streamlining patient assessment. This study aims to develop and validate an electronic version of the SSQ (eSSQ) against the original paper version. Method The English‐based paper SSQ was adapted on the online REDcap (Research Electronic Data Capture) platform to be accessible on computer and mobile devices. Patients with OPD and asymptomatic controls completed both electronic and paper versions in randomized order. Patients with stable symptoms then repeated the eSSQ after ≥14 days for test–retest reliability. Paper‐based and eSSQs were also collected from an independent cohort for external validation. Agreement of total scores between both versions and eSSQ test–retest reliability were calculated using two‐way mixed‐effects intra‐class correlation coefficient (ICC). Results 47 dysphagic patients, 32 controls, and 31 patients from an external validation cohort were recruited. The most common underlying etiology was head and neck cancer. Mean eSSQ total score was 789 in dysphagic patients, and 68 in controls. eSSQ had excellent agreement with paper SSQ in total scores among all participants, with ICC 0.97 (95% CI [0.93, 0.98]) in controls, 0.97 (95% CI [0.94, 0.98]) in dysphagic patients and 0.96 (95% CI [0.92, 0.98]) in validation cohort. Test–retest reliability was also excellent (ICC 0.96, 95% CI [0.90, 0.98]). Conclusion The newly developed eSSQ shows excellent agreement with the paper version and test–retest reliability. Future applications of its use may allow for more efficient and accessible patient assessment. The electronic version of the Sydney Swallow Questionnaire shows excellent agreement and test–retest with the original paper version among patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia and asymptomatic controls. Future incorporation of this technological‐based tool into clinical practice presents exciting opportunities for more efficient and accessible patient assessment.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/nmo.14766
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3045120303</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3045120303</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3136-4bac17b7b797d6d9a5c06d83789aeb8a545316e40eed4947a66a043ed208670a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kF9LwzAUxYMobk4f_AJS8EUfuiVNmraPMv-COmT6HLLmDjrSZCbrRr-9qZ0-COY-5HLv7x4OB6FzgsckvImp7ZiwjPMDNCSUp3FS5Mlh16c4JkWSDtCJ9yuMMU8YP0YDmtOCU8qGaH4LW9B2XYPZRNKoaCt1peSmsiayyzCJQEO5cdZUZbQF5_eLeasMtNF8J7W2u-itAd_dGFk5OEVHS6k9nO3_Efq4v3ufPsbPs4en6c1zXNLgMmYLWZJsEarIFFeFTEvMVU6zvJCwyGXKUko4MAygWMEyybnEjIJKcM4zLOkIXfW6a2c_OwOirnwJWksDtvGCYpaSBFNMA3r5B13ZxpngrqMYSQgLnkbouqdKZ713sBRrV9XStYJg0SUtQtLiO-nAXuwVm0UN6pf8iTYAkx7YVRra_5XE68usl_wC-UKHIw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3044121431</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Development and validation of an electronic version of Sydney Swallow Questionnaire</title><source>Wiley</source><creator>Huang, Dazhong ; Schar, Mistyka ; Wu, Peter I. ; Maclean, Julia ; Pandey, Dheeraj ; Cock, Charles ; Omari, Taher ; Szczesniak, Michal M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Huang, Dazhong ; Schar, Mistyka ; Wu, Peter I. ; Maclean, Julia ; Pandey, Dheeraj ; Cock, Charles ; Omari, Taher ; Szczesniak, Michal M.</creatorcontrib><description>Background and Aims Accurate assessment of patient‐reported oropharyngeal dysphagia (OPD) is essential to guide appropriate management and evaluate response. The Sydney Swallow Questionnaire (SSQ) is a paper‐based 17‐item inventory developed and validated to objectively detect risk of OPD. An easy‐to‐use electronic version with digital output has significant potential in streamlining patient assessment. This study aims to develop and validate an electronic version of the SSQ (eSSQ) against the original paper version. Method The English‐based paper SSQ was adapted on the online REDcap (Research Electronic Data Capture) platform to be accessible on computer and mobile devices. Patients with OPD and asymptomatic controls completed both electronic and paper versions in randomized order. Patients with stable symptoms then repeated the eSSQ after ≥14 days for test–retest reliability. Paper‐based and eSSQs were also collected from an independent cohort for external validation. Agreement of total scores between both versions and eSSQ test–retest reliability were calculated using two‐way mixed‐effects intra‐class correlation coefficient (ICC). Results 47 dysphagic patients, 32 controls, and 31 patients from an external validation cohort were recruited. The most common underlying etiology was head and neck cancer. Mean eSSQ total score was 789 in dysphagic patients, and 68 in controls. eSSQ had excellent agreement with paper SSQ in total scores among all participants, with ICC 0.97 (95% CI [0.93, 0.98]) in controls, 0.97 (95% CI [0.94, 0.98]) in dysphagic patients and 0.96 (95% CI [0.92, 0.98]) in validation cohort. Test–retest reliability was also excellent (ICC 0.96, 95% CI [0.90, 0.98]). Conclusion The newly developed eSSQ shows excellent agreement with the paper version and test–retest reliability. Future applications of its use may allow for more efficient and accessible patient assessment. The electronic version of the Sydney Swallow Questionnaire shows excellent agreement and test–retest with the original paper version among patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia and asymptomatic controls. Future incorporation of this technological‐based tool into clinical practice presents exciting opportunities for more efficient and accessible patient assessment.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1350-1925</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2982</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/nmo.14766</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38396334</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Dysphagia ; electronic ; Head &amp; neck cancer ; oropharyngeal dysphagia ; Patient assessment ; PROMs validation ; questionnaire ; Questionnaires</subject><ispartof>Neurogastroenterology and motility, 2024-05, Vol.36 (5), p.e14766-n/a</ispartof><rights>2024 John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024 John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3136-4bac17b7b797d6d9a5c06d83789aeb8a545316e40eed4947a66a043ed208670a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9812-8373 ; 0000-0001-5108-7378</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38396334$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Huang, Dazhong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schar, Mistyka</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wu, Peter I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maclean, Julia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pandey, Dheeraj</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cock, Charles</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Omari, Taher</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Szczesniak, Michal M.</creatorcontrib><title>Development and validation of an electronic version of Sydney Swallow Questionnaire</title><title>Neurogastroenterology and motility</title><addtitle>Neurogastroenterol Motil</addtitle><description>Background and Aims Accurate assessment of patient‐reported oropharyngeal dysphagia (OPD) is essential to guide appropriate management and evaluate response. The Sydney Swallow Questionnaire (SSQ) is a paper‐based 17‐item inventory developed and validated to objectively detect risk of OPD. An easy‐to‐use electronic version with digital output has significant potential in streamlining patient assessment. This study aims to develop and validate an electronic version of the SSQ (eSSQ) against the original paper version. Method The English‐based paper SSQ was adapted on the online REDcap (Research Electronic Data Capture) platform to be accessible on computer and mobile devices. Patients with OPD and asymptomatic controls completed both electronic and paper versions in randomized order. Patients with stable symptoms then repeated the eSSQ after ≥14 days for test–retest reliability. Paper‐based and eSSQs were also collected from an independent cohort for external validation. Agreement of total scores between both versions and eSSQ test–retest reliability were calculated using two‐way mixed‐effects intra‐class correlation coefficient (ICC). Results 47 dysphagic patients, 32 controls, and 31 patients from an external validation cohort were recruited. The most common underlying etiology was head and neck cancer. Mean eSSQ total score was 789 in dysphagic patients, and 68 in controls. eSSQ had excellent agreement with paper SSQ in total scores among all participants, with ICC 0.97 (95% CI [0.93, 0.98]) in controls, 0.97 (95% CI [0.94, 0.98]) in dysphagic patients and 0.96 (95% CI [0.92, 0.98]) in validation cohort. Test–retest reliability was also excellent (ICC 0.96, 95% CI [0.90, 0.98]). Conclusion The newly developed eSSQ shows excellent agreement with the paper version and test–retest reliability. Future applications of its use may allow for more efficient and accessible patient assessment. The electronic version of the Sydney Swallow Questionnaire shows excellent agreement and test–retest with the original paper version among patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia and asymptomatic controls. Future incorporation of this technological‐based tool into clinical practice presents exciting opportunities for more efficient and accessible patient assessment.</description><subject>Dysphagia</subject><subject>electronic</subject><subject>Head &amp; neck cancer</subject><subject>oropharyngeal dysphagia</subject><subject>Patient assessment</subject><subject>PROMs validation</subject><subject>questionnaire</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><issn>1350-1925</issn><issn>1365-2982</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kF9LwzAUxYMobk4f_AJS8EUfuiVNmraPMv-COmT6HLLmDjrSZCbrRr-9qZ0-COY-5HLv7x4OB6FzgsckvImp7ZiwjPMDNCSUp3FS5Mlh16c4JkWSDtCJ9yuMMU8YP0YDmtOCU8qGaH4LW9B2XYPZRNKoaCt1peSmsiayyzCJQEO5cdZUZbQF5_eLeasMtNF8J7W2u-itAd_dGFk5OEVHS6k9nO3_Efq4v3ufPsbPs4en6c1zXNLgMmYLWZJsEarIFFeFTEvMVU6zvJCwyGXKUko4MAygWMEyybnEjIJKcM4zLOkIXfW6a2c_OwOirnwJWksDtvGCYpaSBFNMA3r5B13ZxpngrqMYSQgLnkbouqdKZ713sBRrV9XStYJg0SUtQtLiO-nAXuwVm0UN6pf8iTYAkx7YVRra_5XE68usl_wC-UKHIw</recordid><startdate>202405</startdate><enddate>202405</enddate><creator>Huang, Dazhong</creator><creator>Schar, Mistyka</creator><creator>Wu, Peter I.</creator><creator>Maclean, Julia</creator><creator>Pandey, Dheeraj</creator><creator>Cock, Charles</creator><creator>Omari, Taher</creator><creator>Szczesniak, Michal M.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9812-8373</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5108-7378</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202405</creationdate><title>Development and validation of an electronic version of Sydney Swallow Questionnaire</title><author>Huang, Dazhong ; Schar, Mistyka ; Wu, Peter I. ; Maclean, Julia ; Pandey, Dheeraj ; Cock, Charles ; Omari, Taher ; Szczesniak, Michal M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3136-4bac17b7b797d6d9a5c06d83789aeb8a545316e40eed4947a66a043ed208670a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Dysphagia</topic><topic>electronic</topic><topic>Head &amp; neck cancer</topic><topic>oropharyngeal dysphagia</topic><topic>Patient assessment</topic><topic>PROMs validation</topic><topic>questionnaire</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Huang, Dazhong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schar, Mistyka</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wu, Peter I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maclean, Julia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pandey, Dheeraj</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cock, Charles</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Omari, Taher</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Szczesniak, Michal M.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Neurogastroenterology and motility</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Huang, Dazhong</au><au>Schar, Mistyka</au><au>Wu, Peter I.</au><au>Maclean, Julia</au><au>Pandey, Dheeraj</au><au>Cock, Charles</au><au>Omari, Taher</au><au>Szczesniak, Michal M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Development and validation of an electronic version of Sydney Swallow Questionnaire</atitle><jtitle>Neurogastroenterology and motility</jtitle><addtitle>Neurogastroenterol Motil</addtitle><date>2024-05</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>e14766</spage><epage>n/a</epage><pages>e14766-n/a</pages><issn>1350-1925</issn><eissn>1365-2982</eissn><abstract>Background and Aims Accurate assessment of patient‐reported oropharyngeal dysphagia (OPD) is essential to guide appropriate management and evaluate response. The Sydney Swallow Questionnaire (SSQ) is a paper‐based 17‐item inventory developed and validated to objectively detect risk of OPD. An easy‐to‐use electronic version with digital output has significant potential in streamlining patient assessment. This study aims to develop and validate an electronic version of the SSQ (eSSQ) against the original paper version. Method The English‐based paper SSQ was adapted on the online REDcap (Research Electronic Data Capture) platform to be accessible on computer and mobile devices. Patients with OPD and asymptomatic controls completed both electronic and paper versions in randomized order. Patients with stable symptoms then repeated the eSSQ after ≥14 days for test–retest reliability. Paper‐based and eSSQs were also collected from an independent cohort for external validation. Agreement of total scores between both versions and eSSQ test–retest reliability were calculated using two‐way mixed‐effects intra‐class correlation coefficient (ICC). Results 47 dysphagic patients, 32 controls, and 31 patients from an external validation cohort were recruited. The most common underlying etiology was head and neck cancer. Mean eSSQ total score was 789 in dysphagic patients, and 68 in controls. eSSQ had excellent agreement with paper SSQ in total scores among all participants, with ICC 0.97 (95% CI [0.93, 0.98]) in controls, 0.97 (95% CI [0.94, 0.98]) in dysphagic patients and 0.96 (95% CI [0.92, 0.98]) in validation cohort. Test–retest reliability was also excellent (ICC 0.96, 95% CI [0.90, 0.98]). Conclusion The newly developed eSSQ shows excellent agreement with the paper version and test–retest reliability. Future applications of its use may allow for more efficient and accessible patient assessment. The electronic version of the Sydney Swallow Questionnaire shows excellent agreement and test–retest with the original paper version among patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia and asymptomatic controls. Future incorporation of this technological‐based tool into clinical practice presents exciting opportunities for more efficient and accessible patient assessment.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>38396334</pmid><doi>10.1111/nmo.14766</doi><tpages>9</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9812-8373</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5108-7378</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1350-1925
ispartof Neurogastroenterology and motility, 2024-05, Vol.36 (5), p.e14766-n/a
issn 1350-1925
1365-2982
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3045120303
source Wiley
subjects Dysphagia
electronic
Head & neck cancer
oropharyngeal dysphagia
Patient assessment
PROMs validation
questionnaire
Questionnaires
title Development and validation of an electronic version of Sydney Swallow Questionnaire
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T14%3A20%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Development%20and%20validation%20of%20an%20electronic%20version%20of%20Sydney%20Swallow%20Questionnaire&rft.jtitle=Neurogastroenterology%20and%20motility&rft.au=Huang,%20Dazhong&rft.date=2024-05&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=e14766&rft.epage=n/a&rft.pages=e14766-n/a&rft.issn=1350-1925&rft.eissn=1365-2982&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/nmo.14766&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3045120303%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3136-4bac17b7b797d6d9a5c06d83789aeb8a545316e40eed4947a66a043ed208670a3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3044121431&rft_id=info:pmid/38396334&rfr_iscdi=true