Strategies of Screening and Treating Post-extubation Dysphagia: An Overview of the Situation in Greek-Cypriot ICUs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Post-extubation dysphagia (PED) can lead to serious health problems in critical ill patients, yet routine bedside screening may be lacking in many Intensive Care Units (ICUs), possibly due to limited awareness for this condition. This study aimed to establish baseline data on the current approaches, the status of perceived best practices to PED screening and treatment, as well as to assess awareness of PED. A nationwide cross-sectional, online survey was conducted of all adult ICUs in the Republic of Cyprus in June 2018. More than 85% of ICUs reported that there was no standard protocol indicating which patients should be screened for PED. Cough reflex testing and water swallow test were the most reported assessment methods used to confirm the presence of PED. Muscle strengthening exercises without swallowing and swallowing exercises were mostly used to treat dysphagia. Overall, 28.6% of the ICUs agreed that PED was common in their unit. We identified gaps in Greek Cypriot ICUs awareness and knowledge regarding PED screening and treatment. Comprehensive unit-based dysphagia education programs must be urgently im-plemented and interdisciplinary and collaborative work between nurses, intensivists and speech and language therapists is needed to address the situation and improve the quality of care pro-vided.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".