Suppr超能文献

鼻通畅性评估:患者评估与临床医生评估通过鼻阻力测量法的比较。

Evaluation of nasal patency: comparison of patient and clinician assessments with rhinomanometry.

作者信息

Panagou P, Loukides S, Tsipra S, Syrigou K, Anastasakis C, Kalogeropoulos N

机构信息

Thoracic Medicine Department, Army General Hospital, Athens, Greece.

出版信息

Acta Otolaryngol. 1998 Nov;118(6):847-51. doi: 10.1080/00016489850182567.

Abstract

The correlation between the objective measurement of nasal resistance and nasal airflow sensation is usually regarded as poor. The aim of the study was to assess the relation between objective indices of nasal patency, as assessed by the occlusion method (RN) and the Youlten peak nasal inspiratory flow meter (PNIF), with subjective sensations of nasal blockade by either the patient or the clinician in groups of patients with rhinitis, asthma, rhinitis and asthma, nasal septal deformity and ill normal controls. We studied nasal airway patency in 254 subjects (37 women, 217 men), mean age 21 years (range 14-78) by RN and PNIF. Nasal resistance was also measured by the application of Ohm's law for parallel resistors (NRO) by estimating the unilateral resistance separately. Subjective sensation of nasal blockade was assessed either by the patient on a 10-point Borg scale (SUB), or the clinician (CLN) on a 6-point scale (3 for each side of the nose). The latter was done in a controlled fashion with the aid of reference sensations. Adjusting for age, height, smoking status and airway calibre, we found good correlation between RN and CLN (r=0.57, p=10(-4)), whereas the association between RN and SUB was moderate and of borderline significance (r=0.42. p=0.05). By logistic regression analysis, we found that the only independent predictors of abnormal nasal resistance at a cut-off value of 0.30 kPa/l/s were the nasal scores as assessed by the clinician (r-=0.26, odds=2.45). We conclude that PNIF measurement and SUB scores are of limited use as indices of nasal patency, although the latter showed an improved association in comparison to older studies. As there is a necessity for some sort of objective measurement to assess nasal patency, the described clinician evaluation may be clinically useful in place of PNIF, but due to its somewhat subjective nature and its inability to detect milder levels of nasal obstruction it cannot be recommended as an alternative to rhinomanometry.

摘要

鼻阻力的客观测量与鼻气流感觉之间的相关性通常被认为较差。本研究的目的是评估在鼻炎、哮喘、鼻炎合并哮喘、鼻中隔畸形患者及正常对照人群中,通过阻塞法(RN)和尤尔滕峰值鼻吸气流量计(PNIF)评估的鼻通畅客观指标与患者或临床医生主观鼻阻塞感觉之间的关系。我们通过RN和PNIF研究了254名受试者(37名女性,217名男性)的鼻气道通畅情况,这些受试者平均年龄21岁(范围14 - 78岁)。还通过应用欧姆定律计算并联电阻来测量鼻阻力(NRO),即分别估算单侧阻力。鼻阻塞的主观感觉由患者采用10分的博格量表(SUB)进行评估,或由临床医生采用6分量表(每侧鼻腔3分)(CLN)进行评估。后者是在参考感觉的辅助下以可控方式进行的。在校正年龄、身高、吸烟状况和气道管径后,我们发现RN与CLN之间存在良好的相关性(r = 0.57,p = 10⁻⁴),而RN与SUB之间的相关性中等且具有临界显著性(r = 0.42,p = 0.05)。通过逻辑回归分析,我们发现,在截断值为0.30 kPa/l/s时,鼻阻力异常的唯一独立预测因素是临床医生评估的鼻评分(r⁻ = 0.26,比值 = 2.45)。我们得出结论,PNIF测量和SUB评分作为鼻通畅指标的作用有限,尽管与以往研究相比,后者显示出更好的相关性。由于需要某种客观测量方法来评估鼻通畅情况,所描述的临床医生评估在临床上可能有用,可替代PNIF,但由于其具有一定主观性且无法检测到较轻程度的鼻阻塞,因此不能推荐将其作为鼻阻力测量的替代方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验