Cent Eur J Nurs Midw 2014, 5(4):137-144 | DOI: 10.15452/CEJNM.2014.05.0009

Criterion validity of the self-report dysphagia assessment tool EAT-10 among neurological patients

Petra Mandysová1,2,*, Jana Fialová1, Edvard Ehler1,2, Arnošt Pellant1,3
1 Faculty of Health Studies, University of Pardubice, Czech Republic
2 Department of Neurology, Pardubice Regional Hospital, Czech Republic
3 Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Surgery of the Head and Neck, Pardubice Regional Hospital, Czech Republic

Aim: The aim was to study criterion validity of the Czech version of the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10) by comparing it with the Nursing Dysphagia Screening Tool (NDST). Moreover, the aim was to compare three items of the EAT-10 that focused on swallowing liquids (EAT3) and solids (EAT4) and on cough while eating (EAT9) with one item of the NDST, the swallow test (NDST8).

Design: The design was cross-sectional.

Methods: The sample included 57 hospitalized patients with a neurological condition. Their swallowing function was assessed using the EAT-10 and NDST. The relationship between the dichotomized EAT-10 and NDST and the selected items of both tools was expressed using the association coefficient phi (ϕ).

Results: For all the studied EAT-10 cut-off scores, the relationship between the EAT-10 and NDST was negative; it was the strongest for a cut-off score of 15 (phi = -0.795; p < 0.001). In all but one case, the relationship between the three items of the EAT-10 and the NDST8 was negative; it was the strongest for EAT3 (cut-off score of 3; phi = -0.701; p < 0.001).

Conclusion: The results do not provide evidence for criterion validity of the EAT-10 using the NDST. Further research is recommended.

Keywords: criterion validity, dysphagia, EAT-10, screening, swallowing

Received: July 23, 2014; Accepted: September 12, 2014; Published: September 30, 2014  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Mandysová P, Fialová J, Ehler E, Pellant A. Criterion validity of the self-report dysphagia assessment tool EAT-10 among neurological patients. Central European Journal of Nursing and Midwifery. 2014;5(4):137-144. doi: 10.15452/CEJNM.2014.05.0009.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Belafsky PC, Mouadeb DA, Rees CJ, Pryor JC, Postma GN, Allen J, Leonard RJ. Validity and reliability of the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10). Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology. 2008;117(12):919-924. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    2. Burgos R, Sarto B, Segurola H, Romagosa A, Puiggros C, Vazquez C, Cardenas G, Barcons N, Araujo K, PerezPortabella C. Translation and validation of the Spanish version of the EAT-10 (Eating Assessment Tool-10) for the screening of dysphagia. Nutricion Hospitalaria. 2012;27(6):2048-2054. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    3. Kopeček M, Štěpánková H. Jak nejlépe hodnotit sémantickou slovní produkci v klinické praxi? Neurologie pro praxi. 2008;9(5):367-370. (in Czech)
    4. Kraska-Miller M. Nonparametric statistics for social and behavioral sciences. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group; 2014. Go to original source...
    5. Mandysová P. A vision for dysphagia screening. Ošetrovateľstvo: teória, výskum, vzdelávanie. 2014;4(1):37- 41.
    6. Mandysová P, Petržilková K, Škvrňáková J, Ehler E. An analysis of subjective assessment of swallowing function in older adults using the EAT-10 questionnaire. Central European Journal of Nursing and Midwifery. 2014;5(2):72- 77.
    7. Mandysova P, Škvrňáková J, Ehler E, Černý M. Development of the brief bedside dysphagia screening test. Nursing and Health Sciences. 2011;13(4):388-395. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    8. Mandysová P, Ehler E, Škvrňáková J, Černý M, Kotulek, M. Tvorba osmipoložkového testu pro screening poruch polykání sestrou. Ošetrovateľstvo: teória, výskum, vzdelávanie. 2012;2(2):45-50. (in Czech)
    9. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW. The COSMIN study reached International consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2010;63(7):737-745. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    10. Schindler A, Mozzanica F, Monzani A, Ceriani E, Atac M, Jukic-Peladic N, Venturini C, Orlandoni P. Reliability and validity of the Italian Eating Assessment Tool. Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology. 2013;122(11):717-724. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    11. Sokoloff L. Reflections on using the EAT-10 tool for dysphagia screening. Toronto, Canada; 2013 [2014 Jul 16]. Available from: http://www.nestlenutritioninstitute.org/Resources/OnlineConferences/Pages/Reflections_on_using_the_EAT_10_tool_for_dysphagia_screening.aspx
    12. Speyer R, Cordier R, Kertscher B, Heijnen BJ. Psychometric properties of questionnaires on functional health status in oropharyngeal dysphagia: a systematic literature review. BioMed Research International. 2014;2014:1-11. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    13. Škvrňáková J, Karásková L, Mandysová P. Změny v polykání u seniorů. Ošetrovateľstvo a pôrodná asistencia. 2013;11(6):14-16. (in Czech)
    14. Tedla M et al. Poruchy polykání. 1. vyd. Havlíčkův Brod: Tobiáš; 2009. (in Czech)
    15. Vejrostová H, Pánková J, Mandysová P, Škvrňáková J. Subjektivně pociťované potíže při polykání: výzkumné šetření pomocí nástroje EAT-10 (studentský příspěvek). Profese online. 2012;5(1):31-34. (in Czech) Go to original source...
    16. Zysno PV. The modification of the phi-coefficient reducing its dependence on the marginal distributions. Methods of Psychological Research Online. 1997;2(1):41-52

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content