AIM: The aim of this study was to gauge the interest of NZL SLPs when proposed with the concept of mobile instrumental assessment units - namely fibreoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) and Videofluoroscopic swallowing studies (VFSS) - along with assessing the benefits and drawbacks of current mobile instrumental units used in the USA.

INTRO: Dysphagia – swallowing disorders – is a substantial health issue in New Zealand. The cause of dysphagia can be due to a range of neurological or congenital conditions. Dysphagia can be an acute symptom of some illnesses, while it is chronic for others. For accurate diagnosis of dysphagia, an assessment using instrumental tests is required. In New Zealand, these assessments are confined to hospitals and therefore are not always accessible; however, in the USA, mobile instrumental assessment units are utilized to service the dysphagic community.

METHOD: Three target groups were contacted with a survey via email. Qualitative information was gathered via three different surveys. Clinicians who conduct mobile FEES and those who conduct mobile VFSS were contacted in the USA. In NZL, public health SLPs working in the South Island were contacted. Two FEES SLPs responded, three VFSS SLPs responded and 17 NZL SLPs responded.

RESULTS: A total of 22 participants consented to and responded to the surveys. Five primary themes were identified in the FEES group, five were identified in the VFSS group and six were identified in the NZL group. FEES and VFSS participants reported things such as high success rates for patient attendance to assessment, wanting to ensure that instrumental assessment is accessible for both rural communities and patients with limited mobility, working in conjunction with local SLPs to expand availability of instrumental assessment and decreasing wait times for the patient down to only a few days. Drawbacks were not reported by the USA SLPS. In the NZL group, participants reported things such as low regular availability of VFSS, barriers for patients to access instrumental assessment such as distance, mobility and socioeconomic status. When asked about perspectives of mobile assessment units, a majority of SLPs reported feeling positive towards this service and anticipated that should it be available, they would refer to this service. Concerns from NZL participants about this service were primarily centred around logistical implementation of the service in the current public health system.

CONCLUSIONS: There is a clear perceived interest and need from NZL SLPs for a mobile assessment unit, but there is not yet enough empirical evidence to suggest that the outcomes experienced by the FEES and VFSS SLPs in the USA would be experienced in NZL.