Background/Objectives: Providing an appropriate diet to older adults with dysphagia can prevent aspiration, choking, and nutritional deficiencies and help preserve their quality of life. Therefore, assessments for determining the appropriateness of food types are required. This multicenter study aimed to determine the reliability and validity of the Meal Rounds Observation Form (MROF), which was developed to identify food forms that can be safely consumed by older adults with dysphagia. Methods: We analyzed 532 food–texture observations obtained from 155 participants (114 men and 41 women). The reliability and validity of the MROF were compared with those of videofluoroscopic (VF) or videoendoscopic (VE) examinations of swallowing. Results: The food-form categories were water (108 pairs), 0j (54 pairs), 0t (118 pairs), 1j (20 pairs), 2-1 (28 pairs), 2-2 (37 pairs), 3 (68 pairs), 4 (67 pairs), and normal food (32 pairs) based on JDD 2021 codes. The AUC was lowest for the water (0.568) category and highest for food forms requiring chewing, such as those of the 4 and normal food (0.678) categories. The sensitivity and specificity of the Gugging Swallowing Screen were 60.1% and 69.1%, respectively (p < 0.001). The agreement between the Gugging Swallowing Screen and the MROF evaluation for food types requiring mastication was 73.2%. Logistic regression analysis revealed asymmetric movement of the corners of the mouth and coughing as important indicators when evaluating food types requiring mastication. Conclusions: The MROF is useful for determining food intake safety when VF or VE tests cannot be performed in medical and nursing care settings and can guide clinical decision-making. However, caution is required in applying it clinically because of its relatively low specificity.
Shimizu et al. (Tue,) studied this question.