JCPSLP Vol 23, Issue 1 2021

made and the chance of false positive results, the p value was adjusted using the Bonferroni method to 0.002 for student questionnaires and 0.004 for dysphagia participant questionnaires. Free form responses for the knowledge- based questions for the dysphagia participants were scored based on the number of accurate responses. Additional feedback and comments to the open-ended questions from the participants with dysphagia were analysed using descriptive content analyses due to the limited number of responses. Results Participants with dysphagia Twenty-four participants with dysphagia were recruited into the study. Four participants were excluded due to incomplete consent and/or questionnaire completion, leaving data from 20 participants included in the study. It should be noted that of the 20 participants, four had attended a repeat DAT session approximately 12 months earlier. There were 14 male participants (70%) and 6 female participants (30%) ranging from 54–89 years of age (70 yrs; SD 9.71). As shown in Table 1, all participants presented with dysphagia as a result of a diagnosed chronic illness (i.e., common obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), 45%; heart failure, 5%) or neurological degenerative disease (i.e., motor neuron disease, 15%; or other, 35%). Statistically significant changes were observed in 2 out of 12 questions on the dysphagia participant questionnaire (see Table 2) including an improved understanding of the participant’s swallow function (Pre 3.76, SD 0.90; Post 4.59, SD 0.51) and improved confidence in managing participant’s swallow (Pre 3.76, SD 0.83; Post 4.47, SD 0.62). While not significant, there was a trend of improved

Table 1 Patient demographics

Demographic profile

Number of participants

Percentage

Gender

Male

14

70%

Female

6

30%

Age

50–59

2

10%

60–69

10

50%

70–79

4

20%

80–89

4

20%

Diagnosis breakdown

Common obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)

9

45%

Stroke/CVA

3

15%

Motor neurone disease (MND)

3

15%

Heart failure

1

5%

Kennedy’s disease

1

5%

Parkinson’s disease

1

5%

Multi-systems atrophy (MSA)

1

5%

Meningioma resection

1

5%

Table 2 Participants with dysphagia (n = 20) mean pre–post survey outcomes

Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test values p value

Post clinic ratings Median (IQR)

Pre clinic ratings Median (IQR)

Post clinic ratings* Mean (SD)

Questionnaire statements

Pre clinic ratings* Mean (SD)

I am happy to attend group sessions for swallowing assessment

4.18 (0.73)

4.41 (0.62)

4.0 (1.0)

4.0 (1.0)

0.102

I want to learn more about my swallow

4.12 (0.93)

4.06 (0.90)

4.0 (1.0)

4.0 (1.5)

0.377

I have a good understanding of my swallowing

3.76 (0.90)

4.59 (0.51)

4.0 (1.5)

5.0 (1.0)

0.003

I want to discuss my condition with other people who are experiencing similar problems

3.94 (0.66)

4.00 (0.87)

4.0 (0.5)

4.0 (2.0)

0.963

I would prefer an individualised appointment

2.94 (0.90)

3.00 (1.12)

3.0 (1.5)

3.0 (1.0)

0.364

I feel anxious about my swallowing

3.47 (1.23)

3.12 (1.27)

4.0 (2.5)

3.0 (2.0)

0.133

I feel confident in managing my swallowing

3.76 (0.83)

4.47 (0.62)

4.0 (1.0)

5.0 (1.0)

0.002

My swallowing difficulties impact on my wellbeing

3.29 (1.31)

3.35 (1.41)

3.0 (2.5)

4.0 (2.5)

0.902

Identification of the main signs of dysphagia

1.53 (1.07)

1.18 (1.29)

1.0 (1.0)

1.0 (2.0)

0.242

Identification of safe swallowing strategies I can use at home I am aware of when to contact my speech-language pathologist regarding my swallow

1.53 (1.81)

1.71 (1.31)

1.0 (3.0)

2.0 (1.5)

0.176

0.47 (0.62)

0.94 (1.03)

0.00 (1.0)

1.0 (1.0)

0.020

* Responses were obtained on an ordinal scale from 1 to 5 where 1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree

19

JCPSLP Volume 23, Number 1 2021

www.speechpathologyaustralia.org.au