Catherine Shaker Seminars 2024: Deep Dives and Practice-Changing Essentials

Join Catherine in 2024 in Sacramento, Indy, Raleigh, Morristown NJ, and the Dallas area ….
  • Advanced Infant/Pediatric Dysphagia: Problem-Solving Complex Patients and Practice Issues
  • NICU Swallowing and Feeding: In the Nursery and After Discharge in EI
  • Pediatric Swallowing and Feeding: The Essentials
  • Pediatric Video Swallow Studies: From Physiology to Analysis

An interactive welcoming learning environment……with multiple planned times for dialogue and questions, problem-solving your patients, sharing our collective wisdom, discussing the evidence-based research…and our shared clinical challenges.

Our discussions will include critical thinking for all our patients, no matter the age. It’s not just learning “what to do” clinically but thoughtfully considering what not to do and why.      Because every feeding experience matters………

Click here for Catherine Shaker Seminars 2024 Brochure
Click here for Site/Location Info

Problem-Solving with Catherine: PO Feeding Post Witnessed Aspiration in VFSS?

QUESTION: Reading through some old posts and some conference notes about therapy feeding small volumes po even after aspiration is observed on an MBSS. Obviously, these recommendations are baby specific based on a wealth of information re: gestational age, medical status, and specifics observed during MBSS. At our hospital, we traditionally see aspiration on a study and pt becomes completely tube fed. I am getting a lot of questions about a current baby who I (in conjunction with medical team) am allowing 5-10 ml thickened feeds 1-2x/day with therapy or family only. Pt takes very quickly with no signs of stress. Can you please comment below to provide if you ever allow po feeds after observing aspiration on a swallow study?

CATHERINE’S ANSWER:  There are so many pieces to this complex question, as you know. No answer fits every infant, as you know. The plan for one patient may be very different for the other— with the same radiological presentation. “Aspiration” in and of itself is not enough to establish a plan of care with any data set as well. We need to consider the infant’s unique co-morbidities, nature of the pathophysiology, objective data under fluoro regarding response to intervention strategies (and the risk-benefit ratio, how precarious the resulting impact was), nature of the airway invasion witnessed (silent versus symptomatic), subsystem function across motor/sensory/airway/GI/respiratory, tolerance for pulmonary compromise, feeding/swallowing history and skill progression, overall health status, and the feeding “environment” (caregivers, risk factors in predictability and adherence to safety guidelines). Focusing on the pathophysiology observed is I think key, versus focusing on aspiration. Then we next focus on the objective data regarding interventions and your confidence in them to avert airway invasion (versus still yielding a precarious swallow during mealtime). For some infants, a combination of interventions (nipple change, position change, infant-guided co-regulated pacing, and, as a last resort, thickening) may yield safe swallows and promote positive motor learning. We hope to leave the radiology suite with useful data to assist us with avoiding airway invasion. That may suggest for example a period of only pacifier dips for the infant (for purposeful swallows without the risk incurred with PO feeding) — this would be on an interim basis while we support and maintain the oral-sensory-motor system and motor learning for eventual return to PO feeding when the risk-benefit ratio yields more confidence (with resolution or amelioration of some co-morbidities and/or improvement in swallowing physiology and/or system underpinnings). We know from multiple research papers that the risk for silent airway invasion is quite high in the NICU population, and often those we take to radiology have the most complex co-morbidities that escalates their risk for alterations in swallowing physiology, even when there is not witnessed aspiration during the study. If there was silent airway invasion during the study, those with a setting of complex co-morbidities (especially respiratory) are the most worrisome to me and are most in need of caution and protection. Practice really doesn’t make perfect; practice makes permanent. PO feeding with impaired physiology, even for 5-10 mls, while using maladaptive patterns, would be unlikely to yield beneficial motor learning, and may at some level, result in stress that adversely affects neuroprotection via the amygdala. We don’t know that yet through research, but from what I have learned thus far, it is very possible. Our critical thinking and the evidence-base must guide us to make the safest plan, and each infant’s risk-benefit profile must be carefully considered in concert with the team.

 

Problem-Solving with Catherine: Guidelines for PO Feeding on Non-Invasive Ventilation

 

Question: Is there a pediatric algorithm or current guidelines/best practices for feeding pediatric patients on high volumes of HFNC? We’re frequently being asked to conduct Bedside swallowing assessments on pediatric patients who are respiratory compromised on 10-12L of HFNC. I’m very uncomfortable with this for several reasons. Our Intensivists are open to having conversations but are asking for the EBP. Any input would be greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance!

Catherine’s Answer: Our current research-based evidence on PO feeding while requiring CPAP or HFNC is only emerging and is limited. It is not sufficient at this time to allow us to create an generic algorithm in which we can have confidence to guide the team. It underscores the high importance of our clinical wisdom —-clinical reasoning and critical thinking —- for this fragile population, whether a neonate or a pediatric patient. The plan for each patient must be considered in the context of unique history, co-morbidities, premorbid status, acuity of illness, presenting clinical course and progress, trajectory of the respiratory course (weaning support vs. need for escalation), clinical impressions and differential, and current risks to health due to potential airway invasion, as each of my colleagues has so well reinforced.

In the neonatal period, with the guiding input of the SLP, the goals would be to minimize airway invasion, avoid onset of maladaptive feeding behaviors, minimize further respiratory system morbidity and avert the adverse short and long-term effects of stress (both physiologic and behavioral), and to support the parent-infant feeding relationship. Carolyn’s 2023 publication (see below) is an excellent resource for this question regarding our NICU population. The data documenting the high risk for silent aspiration among NICU infants is quite worrisome. Our only objective research data on safety of PO feeding for those infants requiring Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) –is from Ferrara (2017) looking at PO feeding on CPAP; the neonatologists conducting the study halted it due to safety concerns. One of the key takeaways for me from Ferrara’s work was the need for objective data regarding the impact of NIV on the swallowing physiology of neonates being asked to PO feed on NIV. Not just whether aspiration is witnessed but the impact on swallowing physiology even in the absence of witnessed aspiration. “Tolerance” for PO on NIV in neonates has been based in most studies only on subjective data, and as such the conclusions appear tenuous. Multiple studies have shown the limitations of clinical judgement regarding airway protection during PO feeding on much less complex neonates and pediatric patients – so our NICU infants with complex respiratory co-morbidities requiring NIV very likely present added risk for silent airway invasion.

For our pediatric patients in PICU, their premorbid history and co-morbidities, and reason for admission are part of the unique problem-solving required. Otherwise- normally-developing children who are admitted with respiratory illness, or a viral process may be expected to follow a different trajectory toward recovery and may be able to take a different path toward return to PO feeding than those with premorbid feeding/swallowing problems or a complex history. There is not an algorithm of which I am aware that can confidently discern those differences and their impact, at this time. Hema’s Desai’s 2022 publication with Jennifer Raminick (see below) is an excellent resource for considerations regarding PO feeding in the pediatric population requiring high flow oxygen therapy. Rice and Lefton-Greif (2022) also reinforce a focus on patient factors in the problem-solving process about HFNC in pediatric patients, especially the setting of the trajectory of the child’s course (weaning support vs. need for escalation), and the interaction with clinical impressions and the potential risk that airway invasion may impact recovery; there is also a lit review current at that time. Our pediatric patients are also worrisome due to the added complications of a high incidence of post- extubation dysphagia, estimated to be as high as 69% in a study by DaSilva et al (2023) see below.

Cross-fertilization of knowledge through patient-specific collaboration with the team (whether in NICU or PICU) is essential. I agree this can best be accomplished by Laura’s and Hema’s suggestion to advocate for SLP consult as the starting point for patients on respiratory support so that we can help guide the PO plan case by case, via ongoing collaboration. Of note, SLP consults in PICU according to Santiago et al (2023)- who noted a decrease in SLP involvement in the PICU (at three well-respected pediatric hospitals) among patients ages 7-12 y/o with a h/o mechanical ventilation, which may reflect a trend, pending further data. While this is not the situation in all PICUs, I hear from colleagues in some that the value-added by an SLP consult is not consistently recognized and a consult is sometimes perceived as likely to “hold the patient back” or delay discharge. This can unfortunately sometimes then provoke readmissions, prolong LOS and/or adversely affect outcomes.

From my networking nationally, a dilemma is not uncommon in many pediatric hospitals across the US. The unfortunate influence of applying adult-based data to pediatric practice, a scarcity of research on neonatal and pediatric patients, an often less-than-optimal acute care SLP consult practice —that would optimally support interdisciplinary problem-solving and care —and the increasing complexity of the patients we see across the continuum of pediatric acute care, all combine to create the perfect storm. We are all in this together.

 

Barnes, C., Herbert, T. L., & Bonilha, H. S. (2023). Parameters for Orally Feeding Neonates Who Require Noninvasive Ventilation: A Systematic Review. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 1-20.

da Silva, P. S., Reis, M. E., Fonseca, T. S., Kubo, E. Y., & Fonseca, M. C. (2023). Postextubation dysphagia in critically ill children: A prospective cohort study. Pediatric Pulmonology58(1), 315-324.

Rice, J. L., & Lefton-Greif, M. A. (2022). Treatment of pediatric patients with high-flow nasal cannula and considerations for oral feeding: a review of the literature. Perspectives of the ASHA special interest groups7(2), 543-552.

Raminick, J., & Desai, H. (2020). High flow oxygen therapy and the pressure to feed infants with acute respiratory illness. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups5(4), 1006-1010.

Santiago, R., Gorenberg, B., Hurtubise, C., Senekki-Florent, P., & Kudchadkar, S. (2023). Speech pathologist involvement in the pediatric ICU. Critical Care Medicine, 51(1), 353

Feeding Resources for Serving Infants, Children and Families

Feeding Flock - Feeding Assessment Tools

Sharing these resources for you to use as part of your differential and problem-solving when supporting infants and children with feeding and swallowing problems.

The Feeding Flock is an interdisciplinary team partnering with families to advance education, support clinical practice, and collaborate on research related to infant and child feeding challenges.

Through their new website (https://feedingflockteam.org), you can access these tools:

Early Feeding Skills Assessment Tool (EFS)

I developed this infant-guided tool with my nursing colleagues, Suzanne Thoyre RN PhD, and Karen Pridham RN PhD. It is a clinician-reported evidence-based tool with strong psychometric properties. It assesses infant feeding skills & behaviors during bottle or breastfeeding for preterm infants to 6 months. There are 19 items and 5 subscales:  Respiratory Regulation, Oral-Motor Function, Swallowing Coordination, Engagement, and Physiologic Stability. An excellent guide to cue-based infant-guided feeding in the NICU and beyond.

Neonatal Eating Assessment Tool (NeoEAT)

  • Measures feeding skills & behaviors during bottle and/or breastfeeding
  • 0-6 months
  • Parent-reported assessment tool

Pediatric Eating Assessment Tool (PediEAT)

  • Measures infant & child feeding behaviors during liquid and solid food feeding
  • 6 months to 7 years
  • Parent-reported assessment tool
TOOL

Child Oral and Motor Proficiency Scale (ChOMPS)

  • Measures observable eating, drinking & related motor skills relied upon for solid food eating
  • 6 months to 7 years
  • Parent-reported assessment tool

Impact of Feeding on the Parent and Family Scales (Feeding Impact Scales)

  • Measures the impact of the child’s feeding on parent & family
  • Birth to 18 years
  • Parent-reported assessment tool

Family Management Measure of Feeding (FaMM Feed)

  • Measures how families manage their child’s feeding difficulty
  • Birth to 18 years
  • Parent-reported assessment tool

 

Catherine’s Research Corner: Feeding Characteristics in Children With Food Allergies

Food allergy 2

So often, the children we follow for PFDs may have co-occurring food allergies and may show refusal/aversion, anxiety with eating, and poor intake, slowness in eating, immature diet, and delays in oral sensory-motor skills. When we complete our differentials, careful consideration of the “why” behind clinical presentation and parental report are essential.  We are sometimes the critical link in suggestions to the pediatrician that a consult be considered to further assess potential for food allergies that may have not been apparent and may be part of “why” the child has behaviors consistent with a Pediatric Feeding Disorder.

Kefford, J., Marshall, J., Packer, R. L., & Ward, E. C. (2023). Feeding characteristics in children with food allergies: A scoping review. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1044/2023_JSLHR-23-00303

Catherine’s Research Corner: Aspiration of Breastmilk

One of my Pulmonology colleagues asked me, “Catherine, do you think it is worse to aspirate breastmilk or thickened formula?” My mind went so many directions… from relevant co-morbidities to overall clinical presentation, to history, to objective data about swallowing physiology from FEES, if there was bottle-feeding experience, and, if so, any comparative data about swallowing physiology…. and then to this latest evidence. The Pulmonologist and I had a wonderful discussion about the possible implications, and what we might take away from their results to inform our critical thinking and our practice.

Breastfeeding and bottle-feeding physiology have differences that, under certain conditions, may enhance airway protection at the breast — via the exquisite and protective swallow-breathe interface, which cannot be duplicated by a manmade nipple. We have no evidence that EBM via a manmade nipple will be as protective as EBM via mother’s breast, though it may offer a greater safety margin and less potential adverse effects than thickened formula. Perhaps more so in the setting of certain co-morbidities, or a unique infant. More data is needed to guide us, but this is certainly food for thought.

Hersh, C. J., Sorbo, J., Moreno, J. M., Hartnick, E., Fracchia, M. S., & Hartnick, C. J. (2022). Aspiration does not mean the end of a breast-feeding relationship. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 161, 111263.

ABSTRACT:

Objective: Breastfeeding is widely recommended as optimal nutrition for infants. However, there are no known publications on the impact of prandial aspiration of breast milk fed infants with dysphagia. The goal of this study was to assess pulmonary outcomes in infants with dysphagia who were given medical clearance for intake of
breast milk.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study included review of 80 infants examined between August 2016 to March 2021. Patients were evaluated by an interdisciplinary team of providers in a tertiary pediatric aerodigestive center. Patient inclusion criteria included a VFSS with documented aspiration or penetration with thin liquids. Participants met inclusion criteria if given medical clearance for intake of breast milk despite aspiration risk.
Pulmonary health was monitored for three months following medical clearance for the consumption of breast milk. Pulmonary illness was defined as development of bronchiolitis, wheezing, unexplained stridor during feeding, croup, pneumonia, or persistent bacterial bronchitis requiring medical intervention.

Results: Forty-three males (54%) and 37 females (46%) enrolled in the study with an age range of 1 month–6 months corrected age. Mean age at initial VFSS was 3.6 months. Twenty-six out of 80 (32.5%) had a report of a mild cough but did not require intervention. Eight out of 80 (10%) received a diagnosis of a pulmonary illness. Seventy-two out of 80 (90%) did not report pulmonary illness.

Conclusion: This pilot study reveals that the majority (90%) of this single institution, small sample size cohort of breast milk fed infants with documented oropharyngeal dysphagia remained healthy despite continued intake of breast milk. Prospective investigation is warranted to follow pulmonary health outcomes longitudinally and a head-to-head comparative study would be helpful to identify whether there were indeed significant changes to pulmonary health according to differential feeding regimens offered and followed.

Problem-Solving with Catherine: Nipple Flow Rates

Image result for Breast Pump Study on milk Flow Rate of Nipples

Question: Do you know the flow rate of Avent level 1 and 2 compared to Dr. Browns flows???

Catherine’s Answer: The data you are asking about is available through the researcher’s paid access portal. Remember that your skills as a diagnostician and observer of infant feeding is the foundation for your differential and for assessing optimal flow rate, which may include objective data in radiology if indicated by your hypothesis. While the flow rate data can potentially add to that differential, your clinical impression via skilled diagnostic observation must guide you every step of the way. The flow rate data is only one piece of information – you could superimpose that on your impression and go from there. But you can still make sound clinical judgements if you do not have the flowrate data from a breast pump. There won’t always be data for every nipple in the unique setting of that infant’s co-morbidities, oral-motor control, unique swallowing physiology and nuances of RR, WOB and overall sensory-motor foundation—-which are essential considerations. Our data set from our clinical experience, and from many swallow studies with a wide variety of infants both with normal physiology (who happen to land in radiology), and with our infants with pathophysiology, together offer us data about nipple flow rate and its interaction with physiology/pathophysiology, based on our training in oral-sensory-motor, swallowing and swallowing disorders and evidence-based interventions. There won’t always be flowrate data but that should not preclude the critical thinking and reflection that underpins our differential and plan of care every time, with every infant. Step back and sort out what you understand about the infant and ask what else may be part of what is happening and stay in that “grey zone” where your clinical impressions become the pathway to interventions.

 

Problem-Solving with Catherine: Considerations with Positioning in the NICU

Question:

What age would you typically start trialing an NICU babe in a more upright seat (e.g., Tumble forms feeder seat)? Thanks!

Catherine’s Answer:

Elevated sidelying as you know has an increasing evidence base that consistently supports its benefits for our NICU infants during PO feeding and also for developmental support. Semi-upright can be supportive for motor learning during non-feeding experiences (and post-discharge as a feeding intervention) when the infant’s postural mechanism and motor learning are ready for that experience.

I don’t think of a particular age or weight as criterion. That would make the basis for this critical intervention too arbitrary, since we recognize that typically infant A and infant B can, while the same weight or size, have very different clinical feeding presentations, and different readiness for tolerance of semi-upright (specific to head/ neck/postural control, WOB, tidal volume and reserves, GI comfort, and swallow-breathe interface).

Whether for motor-learning and/or feeding, I always “ask the infant” by carefully considering that infant’s unique readiness – or lack thereof – specific to these factors, in the setting of their unique history and co-morbidities and developmental goals. That way the intervention – in this case, progression to supported semi -upright – is more likely a true match for our therapeutic goals. And best meets the risk-benefit ratio that underpins our clinical reasoning.

The more I understand about the postural mechanism, sensory motor learning, the effects of gravity on multiple systems, and the potential to recruit adaptive behaviors (and provoke maladaptive behaviors) – the more I’ve learned that positioning is too complex of an intervention to be based on arbitrary points in time.

Catherine Shaker Seminars: Exceptional Opportunities in Yonkers and Boston Around the Corner!

Join me for advanced clinical learning opportunities in Yonkers NY (September) or Boston (October)! Each state-of-the-art seminar is infused with the latest research, problem-solving, deep dives for critical thinking, and strategies you can use the next day. A welcoming environment that fosters interaction and learning along with each other.

  • Pediatric Swallowing and Feeding: The Essentials: Yonkers NY Sept 20-21, Boston Oct 13-14
  • Pediatric Video Swallow Studies: Physiology to Analysis Yonkers NY Sept 22, Boston Oct 15
  • Advanced Infant/Pediatric Dysphagia: Problem-Solving Complex Patients and Practice Issues   Yonkers NY Sept 23-24, Boston Oct 16-17

What your colleagues are saying:

Thanks for focusing on the why’s and how’s and promoting problem-solving and critical thinking when it comes to our kids. Tammy, OTR

So many things I appreciated in the Advanced course! Picture examples, the variety of diagnoses covered, planned times for questions, case discussions, anecdotal stories to help with understanding, and so much foundational research for each topic. Maggie, SLP  

Your Swallow Studies course was the most detailed education I have had related to the dynamic interaction of the oral, pharyngeal and esophageal phases and how they play on one another. Your breadth of well-rounded knowledge and ability to easily relate it to practice is wonderful. She is so approachable which makes it a comfortable environment. The research you provided is phenomenal. Lisa, OTR

Gained a deeper knowledge of factors that I haven’t given enough thought to in treatment and am more aware of current tools/trends in feeding/swallowing. I love that you and Theresa spent so much time on intervention. Eva, SLP

Problem-Solving with Catherine: Proactive versus Reactive NICU Consults

NICU Nurse Decal by AdriansVinyl on Etsy

Question Our institution is currently in the midst of updating the process for order consults in our NICU. We are moving forward with a more proactive approach and proposing automatic/standing orders for all three rehabilitative disciplines (SLP, OT, PT), but at differing times. While there is a lot in the literature suggesting a more “proactive” vs “reactive” approach is optimal for this population, some staff have asked about what specific organizations across the US are doing utilizing this approach, and what the findings have been. I have found it challenging to find specific information within the research to respond to these questions, so thought this would be a great place to get some additional information. I have a few questions and would greatly appreciate any feedback or additional information that you would be willing to share! This will greatly help as we look to expand our program and improve feeding outcomes for our neonatal patients.

Does your institution have automatic orders/standing orders? If so, what level is your NICU?  Also, are orders placed at time of admission for SLP, or is it based on specific gestational age or any other specific parameters?

 

Catherine’s Answer: Having a solid working relationship with your NICU team seems to be the key. I think that underpins their willingness to develop policies that reflect the value they believe that you —and SLPs–add to the developmentally supportive care they are committed to.

As I travel across the US teaching about NICU practice related to feeding, I often ask this question of SLPs in both Level III and Level IV NICUs. My informal data set suggests that about 50% of the SLPs report being in an NICU with standing orders, they most often occur at 31-32 weeks PMA. I suspect that is because there is literature correlating younger GA with increased risk for feeding problems. About 10 % of the SLPs, sadly, have stated there is no criteria and that it is “hit or miss” or consult is received at the “eleventh hour” or when the infant has had persistently poor feeding, now has aversions or only if the infant has “death defying events.”

The others don’t have standing orders. Approximately 40% have co-morbidity-based criteria, similar to Amber’s. The co-morbidity-based approach has increasing evidence-base in the literature, including for example, younger GA at birth, protracted need for ventilation, CHD, CLD, NEC, need for PDA, HIE, NAS.NOW, laryngomalacia, EA/TEF, reflux. For those neonatologists who truly value an evidence-based approach, the co-morbidity-based criteria often just makes sense, and they readily embrace it. They are often the colleagues for whom their clinical wisdom matters, i.e., they are quite in tune about those medical diagnoses for infants whose LOS is often prolonged related to poor PO feeding and seek SLP input to support improved feeding outcomes.

We have come so far in our data about the most fragile infants in the NICU cohort, known to be at heightened risk for enduring feeding problems. That, combined with the AAP’s recent guidelines, has opened new doors. The new neonatal care standards from the American Academy of Pediatrics recognizes the expertise of SLPs for supporting feeding, swallowing and neurodevelopment, as part of an interdisciplinary NICU team alongside OT and PT. Minimum standards for Level II, III, and IV are specified, with a goal to “improve neonatal outcomes by ensuring that every infant receives care in a facility with the personnel and resources appropriate for the newborn’s needs and condition.”

Both Level III and Level IV NICU Requirements support consistent presence of SLPs in the NICU and ensure that NICU patients and their families receive the services they need to thrive in the NICU and after discharge. This includes onsite access to an SLP with neonatal expertise, who is skilled in the evaluation and management of neonatal feeding and swallowing concerns.

Going forward, we hope that cross-fertilization of knowledge continues amongst all NICU team members, so that our expertise as SLPs for fragile infants learning to PO feed in the NICU continues to gain recognition.

I hope this is helpful. Keep up the good work on behalf of our tiny humans.

 

Catherine Shaker’s Pediatric Swallowing and Feeding Seminar: Feed Your Mind!

eating spgahettirefuserpremie scrunched

If you are looking for an exceptional educational opportunity designed with you in mind, this is it. Join your colleagues for Pediatric Swallowing and Feeding: The Essentials to take your pediatric feeding/swallowing practice to the next level!

  •  Sept 20-21 in Yonkers, NY (Elizabeth Seton Children’s Center)
  •  Oct 13-14 in Boston MA (Boston Medical Center)

I bring my passion for feeding and swallowing to every course I teach, and designed my Pediatric Swallowing and Feeding: The Essentials course to integrate foundational and advanced essentials —–  typical development (our template for therapy), atypical development, oral-motor, sensory, sensory-motor, development of the swallow from birth on, tools of the trade, tubes, trachs, preemies, TOTs, airway, swallow studies, weaning tubes, a wide variety of interventions and the “whys” behind them — to support challenging practice needs. I weave in the research and multiple levels of learning to build critical thinking that you can apply to your complex patients immediately.

What Your Colleagues Are Saying:

Thanks for being such a spark to help me keep learning! I learned more in two hours than I did in four days at a different conference. Thanks too for your willingness to both discuss and answer questions about things you both agree with and disagree with. Emma, SLP

I came away with so many strategies and a better understanding of what to look for when working with a child. Really helped me look at the whole picture. Priscilla, OTR

The breadth of material/subtopics covered was amazing. My families and co-workers now have a more competent clinician working with and advocating for them. The course was highly informational, even after my 20+ years as a pediatric SLP. Colleen, SLP

I take a lot of CE courses and I would rate this as one of the best. Catherine and Theresa’s knowledge base and how they presented the material has increased my confidence and skill! Laura, SLP

 

Problem-Solving with Catherine: Critical Thinking in the NICU and Beyond

Sunday Thoughts: Race and IQ Yet Again? | Right Wire Report

QUESTION:

I am an adult acute care SLP. My hospital has an accredited NICU that is fairly busy. We have NICU trained PT’s that work w/ the babies but currently no SLP. An SLP who no longer works in our hospital used to service this population. I am wondering what type of credentials an SLP is required to have to service this population (NICU)? Any specific course and training required? I am inquiring about this for future candidates when interviewing. What training is an absolute “must-have” before an SLP can work with these critical babies? Thank you for any information you can share. From reading this SIG, I know many of you have this area of expertise.

CATHERINE’S ANSWER:

Working as a speech-language pathologist in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) requires many specific skills and advanced learning. These tiny patients and their families are fragile. The family-centered care we provide as SLPs, in support of neuroprotection, communication and safe feeding, create the foundation for a thriving parent-infant relationship. The NICU infant’s history and co-morbidities are often complex and require high-level problem-solving to keep them safe and to sort out all the pieces. It is a privilege to be a part of the NICU team, and it comes with much responsibility. The following are some of the elements of professional skill, expertise and that stand out to me as key for practicing in the NICU.

There are to my knowledge no agreed upon credentials for working with this fragile population, unfortunately. ASHA does have guidelines that you can take a look at. It reflects your thoughtfulness that you reached out to plan ahead for future interviews and hiring. I often receive e-mails asking for insights from adult SLPs working in a medical center, who have been “selected” to staff a new NICU. There are of course no black and white answers to your questions. And we all have to start somewhere. And no one knows everything. It would be no different if tomorrow I were asked to work in adult ICU at the very large medical center in which I have work as a senior neonatal/pediatric swallowing specialist. I could technically treat adults in ICU because it is in our scope of practice as SLPs, but it would be ill-advised, unfair to the patient and family and likely place me in a potentially litigious situation should something adverse happen based on my recommendations or lack of insight and would be clearly noted by an attorney or an expert witness. The risks all around would not be a good situation. But often inpatient pediatric specialists are asked to “cover” adult care when peds volumes are “down”. Each of us has a different perspective on risk and what is an acceptable risk for our patients and for ourselves.  Practice in the NICU is a subspecialty of pediatrics, and is to me the riskiest of all, as these are our most fragile patients.

Infants in the NICU are critically ill or were in the recent past. These most fragile patients can become physiologically unstable at any time-and it might happen during our therapy session. It’s not easy to practice in the NICU environment. Quick and constant losses and triumphs cause emotions to run high. An infant’s status can change at any time. Caregivers are highly skilled and passionate, which sometimes leads to strong opinions and respectful disagreements. The SLP needs to thoughtfully collaborate, yet at times take a stand. Another key trait: humility, and a passionate willingness to learn along with other disciplines. No one knows everything, or if they get to the point that they think they do, it is time to step away and retire. The NICU is too demanding in my opinion to be an initial independent placement after graduate school.

The NICU SLP requires advanced practice skills: It’s not just knowing what to do, but what not to do.  A large focus of our work is supporting feeding/swallowing, so the risk of compromising an infant’s airway is significant. Another essential skill: solid critical reflective thinking. As Drs. Evangelista, Blumenfeld and Coyle told us, “In our work as dysphagia practitioners, we’ve found that a combination of clinical experience and deliberate, effortful reflection on our own practice picks up where graduate school left off. This combination continues to serve an invaluable developmental purpose as we hone our clinical expertise in dysphagia.”

Another key element is solid mentored experience with progressively complex birth-to-3 patients, optimally in a setting which provides an interdisciplinary team approach with PT-OT-ST that supports families and each other as professionals, for a wide variety of infants ranging from very mild to complex feeding and swallowing problems and co-morbidities. It is so hard to access that kind of guided learning when an SLP has to be on the road so to speak and practice in a silo. It is hard to even conceptualize what you don’t know, and to not have someone to bounce questions off of in the moment or really “look” at an infant when you have only your own set of eyes, yet those eyes are still “learning”.

The right foundational pediatric environment will provide critical experience communicating with and supporting parents who are in various stages of grief. These stages of grief are experienced by families in EI even when the infant has never been in an NICU. It provides an opportunity for us as compassionate SLPs to listen, understand and learn how to support in ways that offer guarded optimism, and talk about difficult considerations that underpin airway protection. So that then, later in the NICU, when we work with families who nearly lost their infant, have an infant who is getting worse, or who is unsafe when PO feeding, we have some understanding of the thoughtful communication that is required. The communication from the infant, the child, and the family must always be the lens through which we problem-solve and intervene.

Another key element is the ability to complete a differential, and utilize broad, multi-system knowledge about preterm development and swallowing/feeding and complex medical co-morbidities that are common in the setting of an arduous medical course. This learning comes from multiple sources—previous birth-to-three mentored experience, previous complex patients prior to the NICU, on-going reading of the literature (not just within our field but also in medical, nursing and OT/PT journals) And then the NICU SLP must be ready and willing to not only understand the evidence base, but to bring it to the NICU team. Neonatologists and neonatal nurses will often ask “why?” and we must be able to discuss the research-based evidence along with our clinical wisdom. Ideally guided participation can be provided by learning along with a skilled NICU SLP to further support the critical thinking that is part of this “element” to look for during an interview.

Continuing education is essential because much of our learning about the NICU population comes after graduate school.  That means the hiring hospital must be dedicated to providing the support for education that will best avert sentinel events and optimize the risk-benefit ratio for the institution, the SLP, families, and most importantly, the infant. The courses should be functional, bring the current pertinent research, promote critical thinking not just information, and offer a deep dive across multiple components of assessment, intervention, and co-morbidities – because NICU SLPs will likely see many of them – often in a complex combination that will take patient problem-solving to peel apart. Underpinnings for (and aberrations of) feeding and swallowing in preterm and sick newborns are essential—WOB, state regulation, airway, postural control, sensory, GI, and neurodevelopment, and also the breadth of infant-guided interventions and their rationale in the NICU—-as they will all need to be a part of a differential and plan for safe swallowing. Also, the interaction of the evolution of swallowing physiology (unique to the impact of preterm delivery and/or critical illness for the term infant), airway protection and considerations for instrumental assessment (why, when, how, analysis and collaboration with the team). When I first started in the NICU in 1985, I was fortunate to come to this unique setting after 12 years of solid Birth-to-Three experience with complex infants and children, with wonderful mentors who helped hone my skills over many years.  Despite that, there were so many gaps, and starting in the NICU back then still required me to embrace being a lifelong learner and building a dynamic foundation. Even after many years of complex infant feeding and swallowing experiences (across outpatient, EI, acute care and NICU settings), I still have to pause and really think through these complex little ones, because every experience matters in the NICU. My continuing education offerings, especially my new Advanced Infant/Pediatric Dysphagia seminar are all infused with critical thinking. As Drs. Evangelista, Blumenfeld and Coyle told us, “In our work as dysphagia practitioners, we’ve found that a combination of clinical experience and deliberate, effortful reflection on our own practice picks up where graduate school left off. This combination continues to serve an invaluable developmental purpose as we hone our clinical expertise in dysphagia.” See: Evangelista, L., Blumenfeld, L., & Coyle, J. (2022). How Do We Cultivate Critical Thinking in Dysphagia Decision-Making? ASHA Leader Live.

I hope this is helpful. This relationship-based nature of our work in the NICU, and its potential to influence lives in so many ways, must remain as much a part of our day-to-day interactions with families, always inextricably linked to our critical thinking and problem-solving. As you can see, I am passionate about our work in the NICU, and the tiny humans we care for deserve no less.

 

Problem-Solving with Catherine: PO Feeding and “Chronic on Acute” Viral Processes

QUESTION: Anticipating the coming likely increase in RSV, we are expecting to be treating a lot of babies that are weaning from heated high flow nasal cannula on our pediatric unit. We are typically not feeding babies until they wean to 2L. Do you feed before that?

CATHERINE’S ANSWER: Such great commentary on a challenging clinical issue. For each infant, we need to develop a unique algorithm based on multiple factors. With our infants who were previously normally developing and are hospitalized for a viral process (such as RSV) or respiratory illness (such as bronchiolitis), we would anticipate their feeding challenges will be temporary, and will follow the trajectory for recovery of an acute, not chronic, process. Infant-guided interventions such as manageable flow rate, co-regulated pacing, resting, and supportive positioning that optimizes respiratory stability will be helpful, along with honoring the infant’s disengagement form feeding.

Contrast that with those infants with pre-morbid relevant diagnoses and or co-morbidities that may suggest “acute on (top of) chronic” problems. With this group, we would consider then the impact of their feeding history prior to admission (PTA), their co-morbidities PTA (very complex? moderately complex? one system only?), and aspiration risk (extremely fragile – high Fi02 versus stable with significant support- moderate Fi02 versus weaning support regularly – Fi02 21%), trajectory of their course (weaning of support versus interval escalation), and the prerequisites detailed so well by Hema, above. All of this is considered in the setting of risk to their health/recovery if that infant aspirates or micro aspirates. We might begin that continuum of return to PO feeding via pacifier dips for purposeful swallows as WOB and respiratory stability permit, working closely with RT, followed by the infant-guided guided interventions as described above, watching for subtle stress cues, infant communication and physiologic stability from moment to moment. All of this proceeds with careful attention to the on-going resolution of the viral process(es).

I hope this adds to your critical thinking. Pausing to reflect, as you did, really is the key to mitigating risk for these fragile infants.

Shaker Indy Seminars: Learning along with new and familiar colleagues

Sri

Michelle

Emily

 

 

 

 

 

 

My recent visit to Indy was special in so many ways.

The Feeding and Swallowing Team at Riley Children’s Hospital in Indy were wonderful hosts!  Speech-Language Pathologists and Occupational Therapists joined us from across the US and Canada to learn interactively along with each other, focusing on a wide variety of practice settings.

I was also blessed to re-connect in person with Michelle, SLP extraordinaire who is also a pediatric Passy-Muir consultant who first came to my courses 20 years ago! And there was Emily, NICU SLP who now services my first NICU, that “built me from the ground up” almost 40 years ago in Milwaukee.  And we were joined by Sri, an Assistant Professor from Michigan who teaches our graduate SLPs and came to learn more about neonatal and pediatric swallowing and feeding. Their intellectual curiosity, after years of experience, inspires each of us to be lifelong learners. Really reminds me of how grateful I am to be part of such an amazing group of professionals supporting our infants, children and families. And what a gift it is to learn along with them …… and with you.

 

 

 

AAP 2023 Neonatal Care Standards: Recognizing the Value of Rehab

NICU Nurse Decal by AdriansVinyl on Etsy

The American Academy of Pediatrics has just issued new neonatal care standards that now recognize the expertise of SLPs for supporting feeding, swallowing and neurodevelopment, as part of an interdisciplinary NICU team alongside OT and PT. Minimum standards for Level II, III, and IV are specified, with a goal to “improve neonatal outcomes by ensuring that every infant receives care in a facility with the personnel and resources appropriate for the newborn’s needs and condition.”

Both Level III and Level IV NICU Requirements support consistent presence of SLPs in the NICU and ensure that NICU patients and their families receive the services they need to thrive in the NICU and after discharge. This includes onsite access to an SLP with neonatal expertise, preferably certified in neonatal therapy, who is skilled in the evaluation and management of neonatal feeding and swallowing concerns.

How the NICU rehab “workload” is shared depends on each NICU team’s interprofessional practice, and the unique expertise of rehab team members. That working relationship, no matter what way it is designed in each particular NICU, is the key to meeting the needs of the infants, their families and staff. Together, the rehab team addresses six core practice domains (environment, family and psychosocial support, sensory system, neurobehavioral system, neuromotor and musculoskeletal systems, and oral feeding and swallowing) in order to provide appropriate care for the neonatal population.

Stark, A. R., Pursley, D. M., Papile, L. A., Eichenwald, E. C., Hankins, C. T., Buck, R. K., … & Faster, N. E. (2023). Standards for Levels of Neonatal Care: II, III, and IV. Pediatrics151(6), e2023061957. See attached via open access on Google Scholar