Background
Dynamic Imaging Grade of Swallowing Toxicity (DIGEST) is a validated method to grade the severity of pharyngeal swallowing impairment as a toxicity of cancer based on the degree and ...patterns of penetration/aspiration and pharyngeal residue over a standardly acquired radiographic modified barium swallow (MBS) study. Since its implementation in 2016, areas for the refinement of grading mild safety impairments have been identified by clinical and research users. The objective of this study was to assess the performance and validity of refined DIGESTsafety grading criteria (per DIGEST version 2 DIGESTv2).
Methods
Refined safety criteria were developed and vetted with clinical and research users. DIGESTv2 included 2 changes to the safety criteria. All MBSs with blinded DIGEST version 1 grading were sampled from a registry database (1331 patients underwent MBS over the period of December 2005 to July 2019). New criteria were applied to derive DIGESTsafety grading version 2. Measures of criterion validity, including the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory MDADI composite score, the Modified Barium Swallow Impairment Profile (MBSImP) pharyngeal total, the MBSImP hyolaryngeal components (items 8‐11), and the Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck Cancer Patients PSS‐HN diet, were correlated with DIGESTsafety and overall DIGEST grades from versions 1 and 2 and were compared pairwise between reassigned grades.
Results
With the application of version 2 safety criteria, 112 of 1331 examinations (8.4%) and 79 of 1331 examinations (5.9%) changed in their DIGESTsafety and overall grades, respectively. The safety and overall DIGEST grades (versions 1 and 2) significantly correlated with criterion measures, including the MBSImP pharyngeal total, laryngeal MBSImP parameters of interest, MDADI, and PSS‐HN (P < .0001); correlations maintained a similar magnitude between versions 1 and 2. Forty‐six upgraded examinations (reassigned from safety grade 1 per version 1 to grade 2 per version 2) performed similarly to other safety grade 2 examinations (version 1), and this was likewise true for 66 downgraded examinations (reassigned from safety grade 1 per version 1 to grade 0 per version 2).
Conclusions
Refined criteria defining mild safety impairments with the DIGEST methodology changed grades in small numbers of examinations. DIGESTv2 criteria maintained criterion validity, demonstrated ordinality, and improved the performance of the method in these rare scenarios.
Lay Summary
Dynamic Imaging Grade of Swallowing Toxicity (DIGEST) is a method developed and validated by the investigators in 2016 to grade the severity of pharyngeal swallowing dysfunction (dysphagia) with a decision tree or flowsheet to guide the clinician's review of a standard radiographic modified barium swallow study.
This work reports on the validity of updated DIGEST criteria (version 2) that incorporate 2 modifications to the decision tree.
Version 2 of Dynamic Imaging Grade of Swallowing Toxicity (DIGESTv2) incorporates 2 modifications to the decision tree used by clinicians to grade mild (grade 1) safety impairments based on patterns of laryngeal penetration/aspiration on a radiographic modified barium swallow study. Key findings of this work include 1) the criterion validity of DIGESTv2 with respect to reference measures of clinician‐graded pharyngeal swallowing impairment and patient‐reported dysphagia and 2) the ordinality of DIGESTv2.
Clinical implementation of evidence-based practice (EBP) tools is a healthcare priority. The Dynamic Grade of Swallowing Toxicity (DIGEST) is an EBP tool developed in 2016 for videofluoroscopy in ...head and neck (H&N) oncology with clinical implementation as a goal. We sought to examine: (1) feasibility of clinical implementation of DIGEST in a national comprehensive cancer center, and (2) fidelity of DIGEST adoption in real-world practice. A retrospective implementation evaluation was conducted in accordance with the STARI framework. Electronic health record (EHR) databases were queried for all consecutive modified barium swallow (MBS) studies conducted at MD Anderson Cancer Center from 2016 to 2021. Implementation outcomes included: feasibility as measured by DIGEST reporting in EHR (as a marker of clinical use) and fidelity as measured by accuracy of DIGEST reporting relative to the decision-tree logic (penetration-aspiration scale PAS, residue, and Safety S and Efficiency E grades). Contextual factors examined included year, setting, cancer type, MBS indication, and provider. 13,055 MBS were conducted by 29 providers in 7,842 unique patients across the lifespan in diverse oncology populations (69% M; age 1-96 years; 58% H&N cancer; 10% inpatient, 90% outpatient). DIGEST was reported in 12,137/13,088 exams over the 6-year implementation period representing 93% (95% CI: 93-94%) adoption in all exams and 99% (95% CI: 98-99%) of exams excluding the total laryngectomy population (n = 730). DIGEST reporting varied modestly by year, cancer type, and setting/provider (> 91% in all subgroups, p < 0.001). Accuracy of DIGEST reporting was high for overall DIGEST (incorrect SE profile 1.6%, 200/12,137), DIGEST-safety (incorrect PAS 0.4% 51/12,137) and DIGEST-efficiency (incorrect residue 1.2%, 148/12,137). Clinical implementation of DIGEST was feasible with high fidelity in a busy oncology practice across a large number of providers. Adoption of the tool across the lifespan in diverse cancer diagnoses may motivate validation beyond H&N oncology.Clinical implementation of evidence-based practice (EBP) tools is a healthcare priority. The Dynamic Grade of Swallowing Toxicity (DIGEST) is an EBP tool developed in 2016 for videofluoroscopy in head and neck (H&N) oncology with clinical implementation as a goal. We sought to examine: (1) feasibility of clinical implementation of DIGEST in a national comprehensive cancer center, and (2) fidelity of DIGEST adoption in real-world practice. A retrospective implementation evaluation was conducted in accordance with the STARI framework. Electronic health record (EHR) databases were queried for all consecutive modified barium swallow (MBS) studies conducted at MD Anderson Cancer Center from 2016 to 2021. Implementation outcomes included: feasibility as measured by DIGEST reporting in EHR (as a marker of clinical use) and fidelity as measured by accuracy of DIGEST reporting relative to the decision-tree logic (penetration-aspiration scale PAS, residue, and Safety S and Efficiency E grades). Contextual factors examined included year, setting, cancer type, MBS indication, and provider. 13,055 MBS were conducted by 29 providers in 7,842 unique patients across the lifespan in diverse oncology populations (69% M; age 1-96 years; 58% H&N cancer; 10% inpatient, 90% outpatient). DIGEST was reported in 12,137/13,088 exams over the 6-year implementation period representing 93% (95% CI: 93-94%) adoption in all exams and 99% (95% CI: 98-99%) of exams excluding the total laryngectomy population (n = 730). DIGEST reporting varied modestly by year, cancer type, and setting/provider (> 91% in all subgroups, p < 0.001). Accuracy of DIGEST reporting was high for overall DIGEST (incorrect SE profile 1.6%, 200/12,137), DIGEST-safety (incorrect PAS 0.4% 51/12,137) and DIGEST-efficiency (incorrect residue 1.2%, 148/12,137). Clinical implementation of DIGEST was feasible with high fidelity in a busy oncology practice across a large number of providers. Adoption of the tool across the lifespan in diverse cancer diagnoses may motivate validation beyond H&N oncology.
Total laryngectomy (TL) can be offered for management of chronic aspiration, radionecrosis, and/or airway compromise after head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment. The objective of this study was to ...evaluate functional outcomes after TL in disease-free HNC survivors.
Retrospective case series with chart review.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.
Twenty-three disease-free HNC survivors who underwent TL for laryngopharyngeal dysfunction.
TL ± pharyngectomy.
Post-TL swallowing-related (diet, gastrostomy dependence, and pneumonia rates) and communication outcomes.
All patients who underwent TL for dysfunction were previously treated with radiotherapy (12/23, 52%) or chemoradiotherapy (11/23, 48%). Preoperative complications included aspiration (22/23, 96%), pneumonia (16/23, 70%), tracheostomy (9/23, 39%), and stricture (7/23, 30%); 17 patients (74%) required enteral/parenteral nutrition, and 13 of 23 (57%) were nothing per oral (NPO). Rates of pneumonia, NPO status, and feeding tube dependence significantly decreased after TL (P < .001). At last follow-up after TL, all patients tolerated oral intake, but 4 (17%) required supplemental enteral nutrition. Continued smoking after radiotherapy and a preoperative history of recurrent pneumonia were significantly (P < .05) associated with final tube dependence and/or diet level. Sixteen patients (70%) underwent tracheoesophageal (TE) puncture, and 57% (13 of 23) communicated using TE voice after TL.
Salvage TL may improve health status by significantly decreasing the rate of pneumonia and improve quality of life by restoring oral intake in patients with refractory laryngopharyngeal dysfunction after HNC treatment. TE voice restoration may enhance functional outcomes in select patients treated with elective TL for dysfunction.
DIGEST is a method developed and validated by the investigators in 2016 to grade the severity of pharyngeal swallowing dysfunction (dysphagia) using a decision-tree or flowsheet to guide clinician’s ...review of a standard radiographic modified barium swallow study. This work reports the validity of updated (version 2) DIGEST criteria that incorporate two modifications to the decision-tree.
Version 2 of DIGEST (DIGEST
v2
) incorporated two modifications to the decision-tree used by clinicians to grade mild (grade 1) safety impairment based on patterns of laryngeal penetration/aspiration on a radiographic modified barium swallow study. Key findings of this work include: 1) criterion validity of DIGEST
v2
relative to references measures of clinician-graded pharyngeal swallowing impairment and patient-reported dysphagia, and 2) ordinality of DIGEST
v2
.
We inhale respiratory pathogens continuously, and the subsequent signaling events between host and microbe are complex, ultimately resulting in clearance of the microbe, stable colonization of the ...host, or active disease. Traditional in vitro methods are ill-equipped to study these critical events in the context of the lung microenvironment. Here we introduce a microscale organotypic model of the human bronchiole for studying pulmonary infection. By leveraging microscale techniques, the model is designed to approximate the structure of the human bronchiole, containing airway, vascular, and extracellular matrix compartments. To complement direct infection of the organotypic bronchiole, we present a clickable extension that facilitates volatile compound communication between microbial populations and the host model. Using Aspergillus fumigatus, a respiratory pathogen, we characterize the inflammatory response of the organotypic bronchiole to infection. Finally, we demonstrate multikingdom, volatile-mediated communication between the organotypic bronchiole and cultures of Aspergillus fumigatus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.
Recognizing the imperative to evaluate species recovery and conservation impact, in 2012 the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) called for development of a “Green List of Species” ...(now the IUCN Green Status of Species). A draft Green Status framework for assessing species’ progress toward recovery, published in 2018, proposed 2 separate but interlinked components: a standardized method (i.e., measurement against benchmarks of species’ viability, functionality, and preimpact distribution) to determine current species recovery status (herein species recovery score) and application of that method to estimate past and potential future impacts of conservation based on 4 metrics (conservation legacy, conservation dependence, conservation gain, and recovery potential). We tested the framework with 181 species representing diverse taxa, life histories, biomes, and IUCN Red List categories (extinction risk). Based on the observed distribution of species’ recovery scores, we propose the following species recovery categories: fully recovered, slightly depleted, moderately depleted, largely depleted, critically depleted, extinct in the wild, and indeterminate. Fifty‐nine percent of tested species were considered largely or critically depleted. Although there was a negative relationship between extinction risk and species recovery score, variation was considerable. Some species in lower risk categories were assessed as farther from recovery than those at higher risk. This emphasizes that species recovery is conceptually different from extinction risk and reinforces the utility of the IUCN Green Status of Species to more fully understand species conservation status. Although extinction risk did not predict conservation legacy, conservation dependence, or conservation gain, it was positively correlated with recovery potential. Only 1.7% of tested species were categorized as zero across all 4 of these conservation impact metrics, indicating that conservation has, or will, play a role in improving or maintaining species status for the vast majority of these species. Based on our results, we devised an updated assessment framework that introduces the option of using a dynamic baseline to assess future impacts of conservation over the short term to avoid misleading results which were generated in a small number of cases, and redefines short term as 10 years to better align with conservation planning. These changes are reflected in the IUCN Green Status of Species Standard.
Resumen
Reconociendo que era imperativo evaluar la recuperación de especies y el impacto de la conservación, la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza (UICN) convocó en 2012 al desarrollo de una “Lista Verde de Especies” (ahora el Estatus Verde de las Especies de la UICN). Un marco de referencia preliminar de una Lista Verde de Especies para evaluar el progreso de las especies hacia la recuperación, publicado en 2018, proponía 2 componentes separados pero interconectados: un método estandarizado (i.e., medición en relación con puntos de referencia de la viabilidad de especies, funcionalidad y distribución antes del impacto) para determinar el estatus de recuperación actual (puntuación de recuperación de la especie) y la aplicación de ese método para estimar impactos en el pasado y potenciales de conservación basados en 4 medidas (legado de conservación, dependencia de conservación, ganancia de conservación y potencial de recuperación). Probamos el marco de referencia con 181 especies representantes de diversos taxa, historias de vida, biomas, y categorías (riesgo de extinción) en la Lista Roja de la IUCN. Con base en la distribución observada de la puntuación de recuperación de las especies, proponemos las siguientes categorías de recuperación de la especie: totalmente recuperada, ligeramente mermada, moderadamente mermada, mayormente mermada, gravemente mermada, extinta en estado silvestre, e inderterminada. Cincuenta y nueve por ciento de las especies se consideraron mayormente o gravemente mermada. Aunque hubo una relación negativa entre el riesgo de extinción y la puntuación de recuperación de la especie, la variación fue considerable. Algunas especies en las categorías de riesgo bajas fueron evaluadas como más lejos de recuperarse que aquellas con alto riesgo. Esto enfatiza que la recuperación de especies es diferente conceptualmente al riesgo de extinción y refuerza la utilidad del Estado Verde de las Especies de la UICN para comprender integralmente el estatus de conservación de especies. Aunque el riesgo de extinción no predijo el legado de conservación, la dependencia de conservación o la ganancia de conservación, se correlacionó positivamente con la potencial de recuperación. Solo 1.7% de las especies probadas fue categorizado como cero en los 4 indicadores de impacto de la conservación, lo que indica que la conservación ha jugado, o jugará, un papel en la mejoría o mantenimiento del estatus de la especie la gran mayoría de ellas. Con base en nuestros resultados, diseñamos una versión actualizada del marco de referencia para la evaluación que introduce la opción de utilizar una línea de base dinámica para evaluar los impactos futuros de la conservación en el corto plazo y redefine corto plazo como 10 años.
PDF
