Abstract TP328: Kentucky SEQIP Statewide Approach to Improving Bedside Dysphagia Screening
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Issues: Research has shown that dysphagia occurs within 3 days of a stroke in 42-67% of patients. Of those, 50% aspirate, leading to higher morbidity and mortality due to complications such as pneumonia, dehydration and malnutrition. After reviewing aggregate Get With The Guidelines data, a voluntary group of Kentucky hospitals named SEQIP (Stroke Encounter Quality Improvement Project) was convened and agreed to share data. SEQIP, which included certified stroke centers and those pursuing certification working in collaboration with the AHA/ASA and the KY Department of Public Health, implemented a statewide QI Plan in an effort to improve the care of stroke patients with regard to bedside dysphagia screening prior to oral intake. Purpose: The purpose of this hospital collaboration was to increase overall compliance of bedside dysphagia screening for acute stroke patients by implementing a unified statewide effort. Methods: Baseline bedside dysphagia screening results were reviewed from 16 SEQIP hospitals. Using an interdisciplinary continuous quality improvement process, SEQIP hospitals shared best practices and dysphagia screening tools, such as Just Add Water, NPO Until You Know, Toronto Bedside Swallowing Screening Test, and other validated screening tools. SEQIP then developed a statewide QI Plan that supported integration of evidence-based bedside dysphagia screening, monitoring, evaluation, reporting and accountability at each member hospital. Results: SEQIP’s participating hospitals achieved improvement in screening rates compared to 2008 baseline data as a direct result of quality improvement techniques. Between 2008 and 2014, SEQIP achieved a 28.9% increase in proportion of eligible patients (n=27616) receiving screening (from 62.87% to 91.81%). SEQIP hospitals demonstrated year-by-year improvement in performance. In the analysis, statistically significant (p<0.001) improvements occurred in every subsequent year compared to baseline. Conclusions: Collaboration between hospitals, sharing of best practices, identification of evidence-based dysphagia screening tools, and the development of a unified QI Plan resulted in improved statewide compliance with bedside dysphagia screening before oral intake.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".