Background: Despite rapid growth in the number of treatments to rehabilitate dysphagia, studies often demonstrate mixed results with non-significant changes to functional outcomes. Given that power analyses are infrequently reported in dysphagia research, it remains unclear whether studies are adequately powered to detect a range of treatment effects. Therefore, this review sought to examine the current landscape of statistical power in swallowing rehabilitation research.
Methods: Databases were searched for swallowing treatments using instrumental evaluations of swallowing and the penetration-aspiration scale as an outcome. Sensitivity power analyses based on each study’s statistical test and sample size were performed to determine the minimum effect size detectable with 80% power.
Results: Eighty-nine studies with 94 treatment comparisons were included. Sixty-seven percent of treatment comparisons were unable to detect effects smaller than d = 0.80. The smallest detectable effect size was d = 0.29 for electrical stimulation, d = 0.49 for postural maneuvers, d = 0.52 for non-invasive brain stimulation, d = 0.61 for combined treatments, d = 0.63 for respiratory-based interventions, d = 0.70 for lingual strengthening, and d = 0.79 for oral sensory stimulation.
Conclusions: Dysphagia treatments examining changes in penetration-aspiration scale scores were generally powered to reliably detect larger effect sizes and not smaller (but potentially clinically meaningful) effects. These findings suggest that non-significant results may be related to low statistical power, highlighting the need for collaborative, well-powered intervention studies that can detect smaller, clinically meaningful changes in swallowing function. To facilitate implementation, a tutorial on simulation-based power analyses for ordinal outcomes is provided (https://osf.io/65atf/).