Curtis James A, Mocchetti Valentina, Rameau Anaïs
Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Weill Cornell Medicine, Sean Parker Institute for the Voice, New York, NY, USA.
Aerodigestive Innovations Research lab (AIR), Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
Laryngoscope. 2023 Nov;133(11):3123-3131. doi: 10.1002/lary.30782. Epub 2023 May 30.
OBJECTIVE(S): This study examined the concurrent validity of two orofacial strength manometers: (1) the Iowa Oral Performance Instrument (IOPI) - the current, gold standard orofacial manometer; and (2) the Tongueometer - a newly-available, lower cost, orofacial manometer.
This study compared IOPI and Tongueometer pressure readings across three experimental conditions. Experiment 1 compared full setup (manometer + tongue bulb) pressure readings between the IOPI and Tongueometer. Experiment 2 compared IOPI tongue bulb and Tongueometer tongue bulb pressure readings, while controlling for manometer. Experiment 3 compared IOPI manometer and Tongueometer manometer pressure readings, while controlling for tongue bulb. Pressures were applied manually within a laboratory setting. Lin's concordance correlation (ρ ) was used to calculate level of agreement, with ρ interpreted as 'poor' if <0.90, 'moderate' if 0.90 to <0.95, 'substantial' if 0.95 to <0.99, and 'excellent' if ≥0.99.
539 trials were analyzed. There was a median absolute difference of 2.4 kPa in pressure readings between the IOPI and Tongueometer full setups (manometer + tongue bulb). Correlations revealed substantial agreement between IOPI and Tongueometer full setups (experiment 1: n = 292; ρ = 0.986), tongue bulbs (experiment 2: n = 146; ρ = 0.987-0.992), and manometers (experiment 3: n = 101; ρ = 0.970).
Differences in pressures were consistently observed between the Tongueometer and IOPI. Despite these differences, substantial agreement was present. These data suggest the Tongueometer may be a valid, lower cost alternative to the IOPI for objectively assessing orofacial strength in clinical practice.
Level 2 Laryngoscope, 133:3123-3131, 2023.
本研究检验了两种口面部力量测量仪的同时效度：（1）爱荷华口腔功能测量仪（IOPI）——当前的金标准口面部力量测量仪；以及（2）舌力测量仪——一种新推出的、成本较低的口面部力量测量仪。
本研究在三种实验条件下比较了IOPI和舌力测量仪的压力读数。实验1比较了IOPI和舌力测量仪在完整设置（测量仪+舌探头）下的压力读数。实验2在控制测量仪的同时，比较了IOPI舌探头和舌力测量仪舌探头的压力读数。实验3在控制舌探头的同时，比较了IOPI测量仪和舌力测量仪测量仪的压力读数。压力在实验室环境中手动施加。使用林氏一致性相关性（ρ）来计算一致性水平，若ρ<0.90，则解释为“差”；若0.90≤ρ<0.95，则解释为“中等”；若0.95≤ρ<0.99，则解释为“高度一致”；若ρ≥0.99，则解释为“极好”。
共分析了539次试验。IOPI和舌力测量仪完整设置（测量仪+舌探头）的压力读数中位数绝对差值为2.4kPa。相关性显示IOPI和舌力测量仪在完整设置（实验1：n = 292；ρ = 0.986）、舌探头（实验2：n = 146；ρ = 0.987 - 0.992）和测量仪（实验3：n = 101；ρ = 0.970）方面具有高度一致性。
舌力测量仪和IOPI之间始终观察到压力差异。尽管存在这些差异，但仍具有高度一致性。这些数据表明，在临床实践中，舌力测量仪可能是一种有效且成本较低的替代IOPI的工具，用于客观评估口面部力量。
2级 喉镜，133:3123 - 3131，2023年。
