Hutcheson Katherine A, Aldridge Ella F, Warneke Carla L, Buoy Sheila N, Tang Xiaohui, Macdonald Cameron, Alvarez Clare P, Barringer Denise A, Barbon Carly E A, Ebersole Barbara M, McMillan Holly, Montealegre Jane R
Department of Head & Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Unit 1445, Houston, Texas, 77030-4009, US.
Division of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Dysphagia. 2025 Feb;40(1):220-230. doi: 10.1007/s00455-024-10721-2. Epub 2024 Jun 27.
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.
循证实践(EBP)工具的临床应用是医疗保健的重点。动态吞咽毒性分级(DIGEST)是2016年开发的一种EBP工具,用于头颈(H&N)肿瘤学的视频荧光透视检查,目标是临床应用。我们试图研究:(1)DIGEST在国家综合癌症中心临床应用的可行性,以及(2)DIGEST在实际应用中的采用保真度。根据STARI框架进行了一项回顾性实施评估。查询了MD安德森癌症中心2016年至2021年进行的所有连续改良钡餐吞咽(MBS)研究的电子健康记录(EHR)数据库。实施结果包括:以EHR中的DIGEST报告衡量的可行性(作为临床使用的标志),以及以DIGEST报告相对于决策树逻辑的准确性衡量的保真度(穿透-误吸量表[PAS]、残留以及安全性[S]和效率[E]分级)。所研究的背景因素包括年份、环境、癌症类型、MBS指征和提供者。在不同肿瘤学人群的整个生命周期中,29名提供者对7842名独特患者进行了13055次MBS检查(69%为男性;年龄1至96岁;58%为H&N癌症;10%为住院患者,90%为门诊患者)。在6年的实施期间,12137/13088次检查报告了DIGEST,占所有检查的93%(95%CI:93 - 94%),排除全喉切除术人群(n = 730)后,占检查的99%(95%CI:98 - 99%)。DIGEST报告在年份、癌症类型和环境/提供者方面有适度差异(所有亚组均>91%,p < 0.001)。DIGEST报告的总体准确性较高(错误的SE概况为1.6%,200/12137),DIGEST安全性(错误的PAS为0.4%,51/12137)和DIGEST效率(错误的残留为1.2%,148/12137)。在众多提供者的繁忙肿瘤学实践中,DIGEST的临床应用具有高保真度且可行。在不同癌症诊断的整个生命周期中采用该工具可能会促使在H&N肿瘤学之外进行验证。