Search

Objective: In the dysphagic patient, pharyngeal residues (PR) are associated with aspiration and poor quality of life. The assessment of PR using validated scales during flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) is crucial for rehabilitation. This study aims to validate and test the reliability of the Italian version of the Yale Pharyngeal Residue Severity Rating Scale (IT-YPRSRS). The effects of training and experience in FEES on the scale were also determined. Methods: The original YPRSRS was translated into Italian according to standardised guidelines. Thirty FEES images were selected after consensus and proposed to 22 naive raters who were asked to assess the severity of PR in each image. Raters were divided into two subgroups by years of experience at FEES, and randomly by training. Construct validity, inter-rater, and intra-rater reliability were assessed by kappa statistics. Results: IT-YPRSRS showed substantial to almost perfect agreement (kappa > 0.75) in validity and reliability for both the overall sample (660 ratings), and valleculae/pyriform sinus sites (330 ratings each). No significant differences emerged between groups considering years of experience, and variable differences were observed by training. Conclusions: The IT-YPRSRS demonstrated excellent validity and reliability in identifying location and severity of PR.

The goal of this work was to better understand perceptual judgments of pharyngeal residue on flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) and the influence of a visual analog scale (VAS) versus an ordinal scale on clinician ratings. The intent was to determine if perceptual judgments of residue were more accurately described by equal or unequal intervals. Thirty-three speech language pathologists rated pharyngeal residue from 75 FEES videos representing a wide range of residue severities for thin liquid, applesauce, and cracker boluses. Clinicians rated their impression of the overall residue amount in each video on a VAS and, in a different session, on a five-point ordinal scale. Residue ratings were made in two separate sessions separated by several weeks. Statistical correlations of the two rating methods were carried out and best-fit models were determined for each bolus type. A total of 2475 VAS ratings and 2473 ordinal ratings were collected. Residue ratings from both methods (VAS and ordinal) were strongly correlated for all bolus types. The best fit for the data was a quadratic model representing unequal intervals, which significantly improved the r 2 values for each bolus type (cracker r 2 = 0.98, applesauce r 2 = 0.99, thin liquid r 2 = 0.98, all p < 0.0001). Perceptual ratings of pharyngeal residue demonstrated a statistical relationship consistent with unequal intervals. The present findings support the use of a VAS to rate residue on FEES, allowing for greater precision as compared to traditional ordinal rating scales. Perceptual judgments of pharyngeal residue reflected unequal intervals, an important concept that should be considered in future rating scales.