AbstractBackgroundBased on stakeholder conversations, speech and language therapists have anecdotally observed cases of dysphagia with suspected laryngeal hypersensitivity. These presentations have been coined as ‘muscle tension dysphagia’ often with concurrent laryngeal sensitivity symptoms. However, the role of laryngeal hypersensitivity in dysphagia is not fully understood. Knowledge user engagement highlights a lack of clarity around diagnosis and investigative approaches, limited clinical guidance and inconsistent practice, which leads to inequity in service delivery and care.AimTo identify and present the published literature regarding the definitions and clinical identification tools used during the management of laryngeal hypersensitivity related dysphagia.Methods & ProceduresA scoping review was conducted following Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and EQUATOR PRISMA‐ScR guidance. Patient and stakeholder engagement was embedded at each review stage. The protocol was registered with the Open Science Framework: DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/CUXYN. A multidatabase search strategy identified literature published between 2012 and 2022. A narrative description was used to report the study findings.Outcomes & ResultsThe search identified 2590 citations. The full paper screening was completed on 88 studies, with 17 studies included in data extraction. There was a wide range of terminology and assessment approaches which varied across different clinical settings. The most cited term was ‘muscle tension dysphagia’. The most common assessments tools were videofluoroscopy, fibreoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing and videostroboscopy, predominantly used in speech and language therapy and/or Ear, Nose and Throat settings. Gastroesophageal and respiratory investigations were less frequently cited.Main ContributionThis review details the current evidence related to the terminology and assessment tools cited in laryngeal hypersensitivity related dysphagia to improve clinician knowledge and understanding. Patient and stakeholder involvement indicated that future research needs to: optimize consensus of terminology, and improve consistent identification methods, service provision and treatment approaches.Conclusions & ImplicationsThis review highlights the lack of consistent terminology across the literature. A wide range of assessment tools report nonspecific positive clinical features and a lack of significant instrumental assessment findings. Patients and stakeholders identify the research priorities should improve clinician awareness, knowledge, guidance and evidence to support patient care.WHAT THIS PAPER ADDSWhat is already known on the subject Swallowing difficulties can occur in adults for a number of different reasons, such as neurological, respiratory or physiological conditions. Swallowing difficulties with no evidence of biomechanical or structural impairment on instrumental assessment and of unknown cause (termed idiopathic functional dysphagia or medically unexplained dysphagia) is a poorly understood phenomenon. More recently, concurrent oropharyngeal dysphagia and laryngeal hypersensitivity and/or muscle tension have been posited as a potential underlying mechanism.What this study adds to the existing knowledge This scoping review contributes to our expanding knowledge of the role of laryngeal hypersensitivity in dysphagia by providing an overview of the current evidence related to the terminology and assessment tools reported in the literature. Embedded patient and stakeholder involvement further deepens real‐world insights into the increased referrals for these individuals with increasing uncertainty in how to best assess, manage and support patients. Patients equally have reported that reduced professional awareness and inequalities in service delivery pathways result in poor patient experience and quality of life, and healthcare economic burden.What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? This scoping review draws our attention to an area of practice which has received little attention in both clinical practice and academic research. First, the study raises awareness of this population and the impact for services, speech and language therapists and clinicians; and second, highlights evidence–practice gaps with seldom consistency in the use of terminology and assessment approaches. The study provides priority research themes to expand our knowledge and understanding, as guided by the literature and patient and stakeholder input.