Disparate Practice Patterns in Dysphagia Diagnostics With Flexible Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing: An Exploratory Study
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 31, 2026
Adapting Human Videofluoroscopic Swallow Study Methods to Detect and Characterize Dysphagia in Murine Disease Models
Published on: March 1, 2015
Samantha Ashinoff1, Gayathri Karthikeyan2, Amy Gottlieb1,3
1Division of Speech-Language Pathology, Department of Otolaryngology, Boston Medical Center, MA.
Purpose:
The purpose of this study was, first, to explore current intraprofessional flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) interpretation practices, expecting lack of methodological consensus. Second, it aimed to compare penetration-aspiration scale (PAS) ratings on FEES exams using Langmore-defined versus Visual Analysis of Swallowing Efficiency and Safety (VASES)-defined anatomical boundaries, hypothesizing that using the Langmore framework would yield more "abnormal" scores than the VASES, due to more conservatively defined anatomical boundaries.
Method:
FEES training course vendors and FEES clinical practitioners across the United States were surveyed regarding the anatomical boundaries they employ. Expert raters at a tertiary care center reviewed recorded FEES exams and rated PAS scores using either Langmore or VASES boundaries. Statistical analyses compared (a) the frequency of normal versus abnormal scores and (b) the frequency of PAS 1 and PAS 3 between the frameworks, representing the threshold for dysphagia diagnosis.
Results:
There is notable intraprofessional inconsistency regarding FEES exam interpretation. There was a significant difference in the rates of normal versus abnormal PAS scores, with Langmore boundaries yielding more abnormal scores than VASES. Most notably, a significant difference was found in the frequency of PAS 1 (no airway invasion) versus PAS 3 (sustained penetration) between frameworks.
Conclusions:
Two framework options guide PAS ratings, which differ in their defined anatomical boundaries, directly impacting dysphagia diagnosis. Experienced clinicians adhering to the highest standards of evidence-based practice may still regularly misdiagnose dysphagia with wide-ranging implications for patients. The findings highlight a need to establish a consistent approach to dysphagia diagnostics with FEES and offer a concrete area of opportunity for improved standardization and accuracy.
Supplemental Material:
https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.34790430.
Related Concept Videos
01:29Endoscopic Procedures I: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy
During an EGD, the endoscope can be used to:
01:24Upper GI Series: Barium Swallow
Purpose and Procedure
Patients undergoing this procedure ingest a liquid containing barium sulfate with a chalky...
01:26Endoscopic Procedures V: ERCP
Patient...
01:26Imaging Studies III: Gastrointestinal Motility Studies and Virtual Colonoscopy
Radionuclide Testing
Radionuclide testing is a sophisticated medical technique for assessing gastrointestinal motility. It focuses on gastric emptying and colonic transit time. Radioactive markers track the movement of food through the digestive system, providing insights into gastrointestinal disorders.
In gastric emptying studies, a meal's liquid and solid...
01:28Peptic Ulcer Disease III: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Few clinical manifestations differentiate gastric ulcers from duodenal ulcers. Distinctions in the location, timing, and pain relief are crucial for healthcare providers in differentiating between gastric and duodenal ulcers during clinical assessments.
01:28Endoscopic Procedures III: Video Capsule Endoscopy