| Autor: |
Ottaviano G; Department of Neurosciences, Otolaryngology Section, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy., Pendolino AL; Department of ENT, Royal National ENT & Eastman Dental Hospitals, London WC1E 6DG, UK.; Ear Institute, University College London, London WC1X 8EE, UK., Scarpa B; Department of Statistical Sciences and Department of Mathematics Tullio Levi-Civita, University of Padova, 35128 Padova, Italy., Torsello M; Department of Neurosciences, Otolaryngology Section, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy., Sartori D; Department of Neurosciences, Otolaryngology Section, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy., Savietto E; Department of Neurosciences, Otolaryngology Section, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy., Cantone E; Department of Neurosciences, Reproductive and Odontostomatologic Sciences, Unit of Ear, Nose and Throat, Federico II University, 80131 Naples, Italy., Nicolai P; Department of Neurosciences, Otolaryngology Section, University of Padova, 35121 Padova, Italy. |
| Abstrakt: |
Background: Rhinomanometry, acoustic rhinometry (AR) and peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) are popular methods for nasal patency evaluation. The aim of the present study was to compare these three methods with the reported nasal symptoms to determine the best diagnostic tool to assess nasal obstruction. Methods: 101 subjects were evaluated using PNIF, 4-phase rhinomanometry (4PR), AR, Visual Analogue Scale for nasal obstruction (VAS-NO) and Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22). Correlations among PNIF, 4PR, AR, VAS-NO and SNOT-22 were obtained. Results: VAS-NO and SNOT-22 were moderately correlated with each other (r = 0.54, p < 0.001). 4PR was moderately correlated with PNIF (r = −0.31, p = 0.0016) and AR (r = −0.5, p < 0.001). VAS-NO was mildly correlated with PNIF (r = −0.29, p = 0.0034). SNOT-22 was moderately correlated with PNIF (r = −0.31, p = 0.0017). After dividing the population into symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects, based on their VAS-NO score, the former showed significantly lower PNIF values (p = 0.009) and higher 4PR values (p = 0.013) compared to the latter ones. Conclusion: PNIF and 4PR showed a significant moderate correlation with each other, but PNIF showed a significant correlation (weak-moderate) with the reported nasal symptom scores. |
