Psychometric Properties of Questionnaires on Functional Health Status in Oropharyngeal Dysphagia: A Systematic Literature Review

Table 5

Description of validation studies related to questionnaires for the assessment of FHS in oropharyngeal dysphagia.

Questionnaire	Reference	Target population	Study design	Study population	Age in years; (mean/median, SD, and range)^1
EAT-10	Belafsky et al., 2008 [24]	Orophageal and esophageal dysphagia.	(I) and (II) Cross-sectional study and; (III) pre- and postintervention measurement	(I) Community cohort of healthy subjects; (with no medical history of voice, swallowing, reflux, airway, neurologic, rheumatologic, hematologic, or neoplastic disorders).; Centre for voice and swallowing: (II) Subjects with voice and swallowing disorders; diagnosis: reflux disease (𝑁=66; 28%), voice disorder (𝑁=51; 22%), oropharyngeal dysphagia (including, stroke, progressive neurologic disease, ALS, or pseudobulbar palsy; 𝑁=50; 21%), head and neck cancer (𝑁=42; 18%), esophageal dysphagia (including esophageal motility disorders, neoplasia, webs, strictures, or rings; 𝑁=26; 11%).; (III) Patients with Zenker’s diverticulum (𝑁=23; 50%), reflux disease (𝑁=14; 30%), esophageal stricture (𝑁=9; 20%).	(I) Healthy subject; (𝑁=100; 53 M, 47 F); mean age = 48 (SD = 16); range = NR.; (II) Subjects with voice and swallowing disorders; (N = 235; 127 M, 108 F); mean = 62 (SD = 14); range = NR.; (III) Patients undergoing treatment for dysphagia; (𝑁=46; 21 M, 25 F); mean age = 65 (SD = 16); range = NR
SOAL	Govender et al., 2012 [25]	After total laryngectomy	Cross-sectional study	Large urban teaching hospital	(I) Laryngectomees: experimental group; (𝑁=19; 10 M, 9 F); mean age = 66; (range = 48–80).; (II) Noncomplaining volunteers: controls; (𝑁=20; 10 M, 10 F); mean age = 63; (range = 44–83); (III) ≥3 months after head and neck chemoradiotherapy with known dysphagia (𝑁=19); mean age = 61; (range = 41–92)
Self-report Symptom Inventory	Wallace et al., 2000 [26]	Oropharyngeal dysphagia	(I), (II), and (III) Cross-sectional study and; (II) pre- and postintervention measurement	(I) Oropharyngeal dysphagic patients with neuromyogenic etiology (𝑁 = 45; 27 = M, 18 F); diagnosis: CVA—brainstem (𝑁=12), CVA—other (𝑁=2), Parkinson disease (𝑁=12), Movement disorder—other (𝑁=4), Myopathy (𝑁=3), MG (𝑁=1), ALS (𝑁=6), brainstem lesion—other (𝑁=2), idiopathic (𝑁=3).; (II) Oropharyngeal dysphagic patients as a result of Zenker’s diverticulum (𝑁=11; 6 M, 5 F).; (III) Nondysphagic controls: urology patients, gynaecology patients (𝑁 = 19; 8 M, 11 F).	(I) Mean = 70 (SD = 13); range = 30–96; (II) Mean = 66 (SD = 13); range = 36–84; (III) Mean = 62 (SD = 16); range = 31–94
(SSQ)	Dwivedi et al., 2010, Dwivedi et al., 2012 [27, 28]	Oral and oropharyngeal cancer	Cross-sectional study	After oral or oropharyngeal cancer (𝑁=54; 35 M, 19 F).	Mean = 58.6 (SD = 9.7); range = 35.9–80
(SSQ)	Manjaly et al., 2012 [29]	Oculopharyngeal muscular dystrophy (OPMD)	Before and after repeat intervention measurement	Repeat cricopharyngeal dilatation in OPMD (𝑁=9; 2 M, 7 F).	Mean = 60.1 (9.0); range = 50–77

1NR: not reported.