LAUSR

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. 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. 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. 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/e6usd/).