Single-use endoscopy for the evaluation of swallowing: a performance survey

Aim: Single-use endoscopes have become of interest across a multitude of procedure types given the risk of cross-contamination and availability of scopes; the performance capability of a single-use scope has not formally been evaluated for the flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) in...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Christina Cool, Ian Haislip, Christian Escobar, Jacqueline Mojica
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Becaris Publishing Limited 2025-06-01
Series:Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
Subjects:
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Aim: Single-use endoscopes have become of interest across a multitude of procedure types given the risk of cross-contamination and availability of scopes; the performance capability of a single-use scope has not formally been evaluated for the flexible endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) indication. The primary objective was to measure FEES procedural success with single-use rhinolaryngoscopes without the need for a secondary scope, while the secondary objective was to evaluate the overall performance and usability of the single-use platform. Materials & methods: Twenty-three speech–language pathologists across 16 sites performed FEES procedures with the Ambu aScope 4 RhinoLaryngo Slim. After the procedures, participants completed a nine-question survey questionnaire. A five-point rating system was used to quantify scope performance. Mean ratings were calculated and a one-sample t-test was performed. Results: The primary end point of procedural success was achieved in 100% of procedures. Of the nine performance metrics captured for aScope 4 RhinoLaryngo Slim, six received a score of excellent by 100% of participants with the lowest score being a 4.2. Conclusion: Single-use rhinolaryngoscopes can successfully perform FEES procedures without additional scoping needed, and received high performance ratings among users. Level of evidence: 4.
ISSN:2042-6313