Advanced

Can we always trust rhinomanometry?

Thulesius, Helle L.; Cervin, Anders LU and Jessen, Max (2011) In Rhinology 49(1). p.46-52
Abstract
Objectives: Rhinomanometry before and after decongestion distinguishes a nasal airway organic stenosis from congestion of nasal mucosa in patients with nasal stuffiness. Together with rhinoscopy and patient history, it is used to decide if nasal surgery would benefit the patient. Rhinomanometry measurements should thus be reliable and reproducible. Materials and methods: We performed repetitive active anterior rhinomanometry in 9 persons during 5 months to test reproducibility of nasal airway resistance (NAR) over time. We also did test-retest measurements in several participants. Xylometazoline hydrochloride was applied in each nasal cavity to minimize effects of mucosal variation and the nasal cavity was examined with rhinoscopy. The... (More)
Objectives: Rhinomanometry before and after decongestion distinguishes a nasal airway organic stenosis from congestion of nasal mucosa in patients with nasal stuffiness. Together with rhinoscopy and patient history, it is used to decide if nasal surgery would benefit the patient. Rhinomanometry measurements should thus be reliable and reproducible. Materials and methods: We performed repetitive active anterior rhinomanometry in 9 persons during 5 months to test reproducibility of nasal airway resistance (NAR) over time. We also did test-retest measurements in several participants. Xylometazoline hydrochloride was applied in each nasal cavity to minimize effects of mucosal variation and the nasal cavity was examined with rhinoscopy. The participants evaluated subjective nasal stuffiness on a visual analogue scale (VAS). Results: The long term mean coefficient of variation (CV) of NAR over time was 27% for the whole group while the short term CV was 7 - 17% for test-retest within an hour. Mean NAR reduction after decongestion was 33%, but 13% of NAR values were not reduced after decongestion. Participants had difficulties estimating stuffiness on a VAS in 15% of the assessments, but there was no correlation between the VAS estimates and NAR. Conclusion: We found a high NAR variation over a period of five months. This implies low long-term rhinomanometry reproducibility and we suggest future research on standardised decongestion to increase the reproducibility. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
rhinomanometry, nasal airway obstruction, xylometazoline, reproducibility of results, standardization
in
Rhinology
volume
49
issue
1
pages
46 - 52
publisher
International Rhinologic Society
external identifiers
  • wos:000291894800009
  • scopus:79953200458
ISSN
0300-0729
DOI
10.4193/Rhino10.027
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
3607554f-a90c-4ad5-9141-43af75da156e (old id 2032548)
date added to LUP
2011-08-02 08:58:50
date last changed
2017-08-13 03:59:08
@article{3607554f-a90c-4ad5-9141-43af75da156e,
  abstract     = {Objectives: Rhinomanometry before and after decongestion distinguishes a nasal airway organic stenosis from congestion of nasal mucosa in patients with nasal stuffiness. Together with rhinoscopy and patient history, it is used to decide if nasal surgery would benefit the patient. Rhinomanometry measurements should thus be reliable and reproducible. Materials and methods: We performed repetitive active anterior rhinomanometry in 9 persons during 5 months to test reproducibility of nasal airway resistance (NAR) over time. We also did test-retest measurements in several participants. Xylometazoline hydrochloride was applied in each nasal cavity to minimize effects of mucosal variation and the nasal cavity was examined with rhinoscopy. The participants evaluated subjective nasal stuffiness on a visual analogue scale (VAS). Results: The long term mean coefficient of variation (CV) of NAR over time was 27% for the whole group while the short term CV was 7 - 17% for test-retest within an hour. Mean NAR reduction after decongestion was 33%, but 13% of NAR values were not reduced after decongestion. Participants had difficulties estimating stuffiness on a VAS in 15% of the assessments, but there was no correlation between the VAS estimates and NAR. Conclusion: We found a high NAR variation over a period of five months. This implies low long-term rhinomanometry reproducibility and we suggest future research on standardised decongestion to increase the reproducibility.},
  author       = {Thulesius, Helle L. and Cervin, Anders and Jessen, Max},
  issn         = {0300-0729},
  keyword      = {rhinomanometry,nasal airway obstruction,xylometazoline,reproducibility of results,standardization},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {1},
  pages        = {46--52},
  publisher    = {International Rhinologic Society},
  series       = {Rhinology},
  title        = {Can we always trust rhinomanometry?},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4193/Rhino10.027},
  volume       = {49},
  year         = {2011},
}