Multidisciplinary evaluation and management of dysphagia: the role for otolaryngologists.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The Dysphagia Clinic of the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC) is composed of a multidisciplinary team including an otolaryngologist, a speech therapist, an occupational therapist, and a nutritionist. The clinic was created to provide a comprehensive assessment of patients with dysphagia. All patients are evaluated with flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) and other necessary investigations. Following this evaluation, appropriate treatment, dietary modifications, and swallowing techniques are taught to the patient. OBJECTIVE: To study the characteristics of the population evaluated at the McGill University Health Centre Dysphagia Clinic to better understand the role and impact of a multidisciplinary team. METHOD: A retrospective chart review of 183 patients presenting to the Dysphagia Clinic since its creation in December 2004 was conducted. Information regarding demographics, etiology, comorbidities, additional referrals or investigations, treatment, and outcome was collected. RESULTS: The majority of patients (61%) were referred by otolaryngologists. The FEES was normal for all consistencies in 28% of patients, and pooling was the most frequently encountered abnormality. The most common etiologies were neurologic (27%), laryngopharyngeal reflux (22%), and malignancy (21%). The four treatment modalities consisted of dietary modifications (37%), teaching of therapeutic swallowing manoeuvres (33%), medical treatment (26%), and surgical treatment (11%). CONCLUSION: A multidisciplinary dysphagia clinic is an invaluable resource for patients suffering from cervical dysphagia. As the etiologies and initial presentation of patients vary greatly, otolaryngologists' expertise in endoscopy gives them a critical role in the evaluation of this condition.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".