Abstract
As yet there is no established procedure to ensure the repeatability of acoustic rhinometry measurements although anecdotal evidence suggests that instrument fixation improves repeatability. The aim of this study is to validate the methodology of acoustic rhinometry and determine whether instrument fixation and head stabilisation is necessary. Four methods were compared in fifteen healthy volunteers, after nasal decongestion: A) Patient holding the probe (patient-held), B) Probe fixed in a probe stand (probe-stand), C) Probe fixed in stand and head stabilised in head rest (head-rest), D) Examiner holding the probe (examiner-performed). The two minimum cross-sectional areas and volume between 0 and 5 cm were recorded. The examiner-performed and probe-strand methods were consistently less variable than the other methods. With examiner-performed method, this was significant (p
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 93-97 |
Number of pages | 4 |
Journal | Rhinology |
Volume | 39 |
Issue number | 2 |
Publication status | Published - 2001 |
Keywords
- Acoustic rhinometry
- Head-rest
- Nasal volume
- Probe-stand
- Variability