The Use of Cervical Auscultation to Predict Oropharyngeal Aspiration in Children

A Randomized Controlled Trial

Thuy Frakking, Anne Chang, Kerry-Ann O'Grady, Michael David, Katie Walker-Smith, Kelly Weir

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

In this study, we aimed to determine if the use of cervical auscultation (CA) as an adjunct to the clinical feeding evaluation (CFE + CA) improves the reliability of predicting oropharyngeal aspiration (abbreviated to aspiration) in children. The design of the study is based on open label, randomized controlled trial with concealed allocation. Results from children (<18 years) randomized to either CFE or CFE + CA were compared to videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS), the reference standard data. Aspiration was defined using the Penetration-Aspiration Scale. All assessments were undertaken at a single tertiary pediatric hospital. 155 children referred for a feeding/swallowing assessment were randomized into the CFE n = 83 [38 males; mean age = 34.9 months (SD 34.4)] or CFE + CA n = 72 [43 males; mean age = 39.6 months (SD 39.3)] group. kappa statistic, sensitivity, and specificity values, area under receiver operating curve (aROC). No significant differences between groups were found, although CFE + CA (kappa = 0.41, 95 % CI 0.2–0.62) had higher agreement for aspiration detection by VFSS, compared to the clinical feeding exam alone (kappa = 0.31, 95 % CI 0.10–0.52). Sensitivity was 85 % (95 % CI 62.1–96.8) for CFE + CA and 63.6 % (95 % CI 45.1–79.6) for CFE. aROC was not significantly greater for CFE + CA (0.75, 95 % CI 0.65–0.86) than CFE (0.66, 95 % CI 0.55–0.76) across all age groups. Although using CA as an adjunct to the clinical feeding evaluation improves the sensitivity of predicting aspiration in children, it is not sensitive enough as a diagnostic tool in isolation. Given the serious implications of missing the diagnosis of aspiration, instrumental assessments (e.g., VFSS), remain the preferred standard.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)738-748
Number of pages11
JournalDysphagia
Volume31
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2016

Fingerprint

Auscultation
Randomized Controlled Trials
Deglutition
Pediatric Hospitals
Tertiary Care Centers
Age Groups
Sensitivity and Specificity

Cite this

Frakking, Thuy ; Chang, Anne ; O'Grady, Kerry-Ann ; David, Michael ; Walker-Smith, Katie ; Weir, Kelly. / The Use of Cervical Auscultation to Predict Oropharyngeal Aspiration in Children : A Randomized Controlled Trial. In: Dysphagia . 2016 ; Vol. 31, No. 6. pp. 738-748.
@article{f33c6bcd6ed54acd9c557951f389f90f,
title = "The Use of Cervical Auscultation to Predict Oropharyngeal Aspiration in Children: A Randomized Controlled Trial",
abstract = "In this study, we aimed to determine if the use of cervical auscultation (CA) as an adjunct to the clinical feeding evaluation (CFE + CA) improves the reliability of predicting oropharyngeal aspiration (abbreviated to aspiration) in children. The design of the study is based on open label, randomized controlled trial with concealed allocation. Results from children (<18 years) randomized to either CFE or CFE + CA were compared to videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS), the reference standard data. Aspiration was defined using the Penetration-Aspiration Scale. All assessments were undertaken at a single tertiary pediatric hospital. 155 children referred for a feeding/swallowing assessment were randomized into the CFE n = 83 [38 males; mean age = 34.9 months (SD 34.4)] or CFE + CA n = 72 [43 males; mean age = 39.6 months (SD 39.3)] group. kappa statistic, sensitivity, and specificity values, area under receiver operating curve (aROC). No significant differences between groups were found, although CFE + CA (kappa = 0.41, 95 {\%} CI 0.2–0.62) had higher agreement for aspiration detection by VFSS, compared to the clinical feeding exam alone (kappa = 0.31, 95 {\%} CI 0.10–0.52). Sensitivity was 85 {\%} (95 {\%} CI 62.1–96.8) for CFE + CA and 63.6 {\%} (95 {\%} CI 45.1–79.6) for CFE. aROC was not significantly greater for CFE + CA (0.75, 95 {\%} CI 0.65–0.86) than CFE (0.66, 95 {\%} CI 0.55–0.76) across all age groups. Although using CA as an adjunct to the clinical feeding evaluation improves the sensitivity of predicting aspiration in children, it is not sensitive enough as a diagnostic tool in isolation. Given the serious implications of missing the diagnosis of aspiration, instrumental assessments (e.g., VFSS), remain the preferred standard.",
author = "Thuy Frakking and Anne Chang and Kerry-Ann O'Grady and Michael David and Katie Walker-Smith and Kelly Weir",
year = "2016",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1007/s00455-016-9727-5",
language = "English",
volume = "31",
pages = "738--748",
journal = "Dysphagia",
issn = "0179-051X",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "6",

}

The Use of Cervical Auscultation to Predict Oropharyngeal Aspiration in Children : A Randomized Controlled Trial. / Frakking, Thuy; Chang, Anne; O'Grady, Kerry-Ann; David, Michael; Walker-Smith, Katie; Weir, Kelly.

In: Dysphagia , Vol. 31, No. 6, 12.2016, p. 738-748.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Use of Cervical Auscultation to Predict Oropharyngeal Aspiration in Children

T2 - A Randomized Controlled Trial

AU - Frakking, Thuy

AU - Chang, Anne

AU - O'Grady, Kerry-Ann

AU - David, Michael

AU - Walker-Smith, Katie

AU - Weir, Kelly

PY - 2016/12

Y1 - 2016/12

N2 - In this study, we aimed to determine if the use of cervical auscultation (CA) as an adjunct to the clinical feeding evaluation (CFE + CA) improves the reliability of predicting oropharyngeal aspiration (abbreviated to aspiration) in children. The design of the study is based on open label, randomized controlled trial with concealed allocation. Results from children (<18 years) randomized to either CFE or CFE + CA were compared to videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS), the reference standard data. Aspiration was defined using the Penetration-Aspiration Scale. All assessments were undertaken at a single tertiary pediatric hospital. 155 children referred for a feeding/swallowing assessment were randomized into the CFE n = 83 [38 males; mean age = 34.9 months (SD 34.4)] or CFE + CA n = 72 [43 males; mean age = 39.6 months (SD 39.3)] group. kappa statistic, sensitivity, and specificity values, area under receiver operating curve (aROC). No significant differences between groups were found, although CFE + CA (kappa = 0.41, 95 % CI 0.2–0.62) had higher agreement for aspiration detection by VFSS, compared to the clinical feeding exam alone (kappa = 0.31, 95 % CI 0.10–0.52). Sensitivity was 85 % (95 % CI 62.1–96.8) for CFE + CA and 63.6 % (95 % CI 45.1–79.6) for CFE. aROC was not significantly greater for CFE + CA (0.75, 95 % CI 0.65–0.86) than CFE (0.66, 95 % CI 0.55–0.76) across all age groups. Although using CA as an adjunct to the clinical feeding evaluation improves the sensitivity of predicting aspiration in children, it is not sensitive enough as a diagnostic tool in isolation. Given the serious implications of missing the diagnosis of aspiration, instrumental assessments (e.g., VFSS), remain the preferred standard.

AB - In this study, we aimed to determine if the use of cervical auscultation (CA) as an adjunct to the clinical feeding evaluation (CFE + CA) improves the reliability of predicting oropharyngeal aspiration (abbreviated to aspiration) in children. The design of the study is based on open label, randomized controlled trial with concealed allocation. Results from children (<18 years) randomized to either CFE or CFE + CA were compared to videofluoroscopic swallow study (VFSS), the reference standard data. Aspiration was defined using the Penetration-Aspiration Scale. All assessments were undertaken at a single tertiary pediatric hospital. 155 children referred for a feeding/swallowing assessment were randomized into the CFE n = 83 [38 males; mean age = 34.9 months (SD 34.4)] or CFE + CA n = 72 [43 males; mean age = 39.6 months (SD 39.3)] group. kappa statistic, sensitivity, and specificity values, area under receiver operating curve (aROC). No significant differences between groups were found, although CFE + CA (kappa = 0.41, 95 % CI 0.2–0.62) had higher agreement for aspiration detection by VFSS, compared to the clinical feeding exam alone (kappa = 0.31, 95 % CI 0.10–0.52). Sensitivity was 85 % (95 % CI 62.1–96.8) for CFE + CA and 63.6 % (95 % CI 45.1–79.6) for CFE. aROC was not significantly greater for CFE + CA (0.75, 95 % CI 0.65–0.86) than CFE (0.66, 95 % CI 0.55–0.76) across all age groups. Although using CA as an adjunct to the clinical feeding evaluation improves the sensitivity of predicting aspiration in children, it is not sensitive enough as a diagnostic tool in isolation. Given the serious implications of missing the diagnosis of aspiration, instrumental assessments (e.g., VFSS), remain the preferred standard.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84978153386&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00455-016-9727-5

DO - 10.1007/s00455-016-9727-5

M3 - Article

VL - 31

SP - 738

EP - 748

JO - Dysphagia

JF - Dysphagia

SN - 0179-051X

IS - 6

ER -