Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Comparison of rhinometric measurements methods in intranasal pathology.
Rhinology. 2003 Jun; 41(2):65-8.R

Abstract

The objective of this study was to determine how well different rhinometric measurement methods identify intranasal changes during acute viral rhinitis. A total of 69 patients acutely ill with the common cold were examined. Acoustic rhinometry (AR), rhinomanometry (RMM), nasal PEF (nPEF) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) recordings were performed before the subjects became ill and after the onset of the infection, on days 3 and 10. In AR the minimal cross-sectional area and nasal cavity volumes decreased in a statistically significant manner during the early stage of infection (20.0% vs. 20.4% lower than baselines), and at the end of the infection the values were normalizing towards the baseline values, although still 7.2% vs. 10.4% lower than baselines (p < 0.05). In RMM the total resistances during expiration and inspiration strongly increased, 39.7% vs. 41.6% higher than baselines on day 3. On day 10 the resistances were normalizing slowly but remained 34.1% and 41.5% higher than baselines (p < 0.05). In nPEF the decrease in rates was also seen on day 3 (25.0% lower than baseline) and recovery in rates on day 10 (only 3.1% lower than baseline, p < 0.05). The changes in VAS were similar to those seen in objective rhinometric measurements. Statistically and clinically significant correlations were calculated within AR parameters (r = 0.96) and RMM parameters (r = 0.98), other rhinometric parameters did not correlate in a clinically significant manner (r < 0.40). We concluded that these 4 rhinometric methods support each other very well in pathological noses, and the methods employed identify intranasal changes very sensitively during an intranasal mucosal pathology.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland. jura.numminen@pshp.fiNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

12868368

Citation

Numminen, Jura, et al. "Comparison of Rhinometric Measurements Methods in Intranasal Pathology." Rhinology, vol. 41, no. 2, 2003, pp. 65-8.
Numminen J, Ahtinen M, Huhtala H, et al. Comparison of rhinometric measurements methods in intranasal pathology. Rhinology. 2003;41(2):65-8.
Numminen, J., Ahtinen, M., Huhtala, H., & Rautiainen, M. (2003). Comparison of rhinometric measurements methods in intranasal pathology. Rhinology, 41(2), 65-8.
Numminen J, et al. Comparison of Rhinometric Measurements Methods in Intranasal Pathology. Rhinology. 2003;41(2):65-8. PubMed PMID: 12868368.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Comparison of rhinometric measurements methods in intranasal pathology. AU - Numminen,Jura, AU - Ahtinen,Mikko, AU - Huhtala,Heini, AU - Rautiainen,Markus, PY - 2003/7/19/pubmed PY - 2003/11/1/medline PY - 2003/7/19/entrez SP - 65 EP - 8 JF - Rhinology JO - Rhinology VL - 41 IS - 2 N2 - The objective of this study was to determine how well different rhinometric measurement methods identify intranasal changes during acute viral rhinitis. A total of 69 patients acutely ill with the common cold were examined. Acoustic rhinometry (AR), rhinomanometry (RMM), nasal PEF (nPEF) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) recordings were performed before the subjects became ill and after the onset of the infection, on days 3 and 10. In AR the minimal cross-sectional area and nasal cavity volumes decreased in a statistically significant manner during the early stage of infection (20.0% vs. 20.4% lower than baselines), and at the end of the infection the values were normalizing towards the baseline values, although still 7.2% vs. 10.4% lower than baselines (p < 0.05). In RMM the total resistances during expiration and inspiration strongly increased, 39.7% vs. 41.6% higher than baselines on day 3. On day 10 the resistances were normalizing slowly but remained 34.1% and 41.5% higher than baselines (p < 0.05). In nPEF the decrease in rates was also seen on day 3 (25.0% lower than baseline) and recovery in rates on day 10 (only 3.1% lower than baseline, p < 0.05). The changes in VAS were similar to those seen in objective rhinometric measurements. Statistically and clinically significant correlations were calculated within AR parameters (r = 0.96) and RMM parameters (r = 0.98), other rhinometric parameters did not correlate in a clinically significant manner (r < 0.40). We concluded that these 4 rhinometric methods support each other very well in pathological noses, and the methods employed identify intranasal changes very sensitively during an intranasal mucosal pathology. SN - 0300-0729 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/12868368/Comparison_of_rhinometric_measurements_methods_in_intranasal_pathology_ L2 - https://www.rhinologyjournal.com/Abstract.php?id=371 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -