Barriers and Enablers to Nurses Routinely Screening for Oropharyngeal Dysphagia in Hospitalised Older Adults: An Evidence Synthesis of Qualitative Studies

AIM: To identify and describe the barriers and enablers to nurses routinely screening for dysphagia in hospital and map these to domains in the Theoretical Domains Framework. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-ethnography. DATA BASE SOURCES: CINAHL, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Clinical Trials and World Health Organisation trials registry (database inception to November 2024). METHODS: The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024608080). Studies set in stroke and older adult wards were included. Data were coded as barriers or enablers, mapped to the original authors' themes and then synthesised into higher-level themes. Barrier and enabler codes were also mapped to domains in the Theoretical Domains Framework. RESULTS: From 6750 studies identified, six were included. None of the included papers were conducted in an older adult ward setting. Four high-level themes were developed: (i) The surrounding environment, (ii) Variation in practice, (iii) Influence of knowledge and skills, and (iv) The value of dysphagia screening. Identified barriers and enablers were predominantly mapped to 'Environmental context and resources,' 'Knowledge,' 'Beliefs about capabilities' and 'Beliefs about consequences' Theoretical Domains Framework domains. CONCLUSIONS: For successful dysphagia screening, nurses require adequate training, a standardised screening tool and sufficient environmental support. Further work is required to contextualise these findings specifically to older adult ward settings. IMPACT: To introduce routine nurse screening for dysphagia into different contexts, this paper provides guidance on how to set up and create a theory informed service. Mapping of barriers and enablers to the Theoretical Domains Framework can facilitate the development of a behaviour change intervention through the framework's linkage to a taxonomy of behaviour changes strategies. REPORTING METHOD: ENhancing Transparency in REporting the synthesis of Qualitative research. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patient and public involvement focused on interpretation of findings, ensuring the review identified patient-relevant priorities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024608080.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Advanced Nursing
Published
2026-09-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.70749
Primary Topic
Dysphagia Assessment and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Barriers and Enablers to Nurses Routinely Screening for Oropharyngeal Dysphagia in Hospitalised Older Adults: An Evidence Synthesis of Qualitative Studies

Caroline Smith, Joseph Charles Manning, Lizelle Bernhardt, Linda Birt et al.
Journal of Advanced Nursing
Dysphagia Assessment and Management
article

Barriers and Enablers to Nurses Routinely Screening for Oropharyngeal Dysphagia in Hospitalised Older Adults: An Evidence Synthesis of Qualitative Studies

Caroline Smith, Joseph Charles Manning, Lizelle Bernhardt, Linda Birt, Lynn MacDiarmid, Noelle Robertson, David Wright, Dharinee Hansjee, Allan Clark, Paresh Parmar
article en

Abstract

AIM: To identify and describe the barriers and enablers to nurses routinely screening for dysphagia in hospital and map these to domains in the Theoretical Domains Framework. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-ethnography. DATA BASE SOURCES: CINAHL, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Clinical Trials and World Health Organisation trials registry (database inception to November 2024). METHODS: The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024608080). Studies set in stroke and older adult wards were included. Data were coded as barriers or enablers, mapped to the original authors' themes and then synthesised into higher-level themes. Barrier and enabler codes were also mapped to domains in the Theoretical Domains Framework. RESULTS: From 6750 studies identified, six were included. None of the included papers were conducted in an older adult ward setting. Four high-level themes were developed: (i) The surrounding environment, (ii) Variation in practice, (iii) Influence of knowledge and skills, and (iv) The value of dysphagia screening. Identified barriers and enablers were predominantly mapped to 'Environmental context and resources,' 'Knowledge,' 'Beliefs about capabilities' and 'Beliefs about consequences' Theoretical Domains Framework domains. CONCLUSIONS: For successful dysphagia screening, nurses require adequate training, a standardised screening tool and sufficient environmental support. Further work is required to contextualise these findings specifically to older adult ward settings. IMPACT: To introduce routine nurse screening for dysphagia into different contexts, this paper provides guidance on how to set up and create a theory informed service. Mapping of barriers and enablers to the Theoretical Domains Framework can facilitate the development of a behaviour change intervention through the framework's linkage to a taxonomy of behaviour changes strategies. REPORTING METHOD: ENhancing Transparency in REporting the synthesis of Qualitative research. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patient and public involvement focused on interpretation of findings, ensuring the review identified patient-relevant priorities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024608080.

Journal of Advanced Nursing
University of East Anglia (GB), University of Leicester (GB), Northwick Park Hospital (GB), Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust (GB), University of Greenwich (GB)
National Institute for Health and Care Research, Department of Health and Social Care, Programme Development Grants
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Dysphagia Assessment and Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.