Comparison of classic and 4-phase rhinomanometry methods, is there any difference?

Wong, E. H. and Eccles, Ronald ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9492-2062 2014. Comparison of classic and 4-phase rhinomanometry methods, is there any difference? Rhinology 52 (4) , pp. 360-365.

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are various different parameters used to measure nasal airway resistance (NAR) in rhinomanometry, which include the classic method at fixed pressure of 150Pa or 75Pa and 4-phase rhinomanometry. This study aims to determine if there is any difference between the measurements of NAR obtained by the classic and 4-phase rhinomanometry methods. METHODOLOGY: In-vitro study with measurements of NAR using both methods when applied across four artificial nose models. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found between NAR values obtained from both methods. Strong, positive correlations were found between NAR measured with both methods, which were statistically significant. Bland-Altman method also showed good agreement between both methods with narrow limits of agreement. CONCLUSION: There is high level of conformity between the values of nasal airway resistance measured using both methods.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Biosciences
Subjects:	R Medicine > RF Otorhinolaryngology
Publisher:	International Rhinologic Society
ISSN:	0300-0729
Related URLs:	http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25479...
Last Modified:	28 Oct 2022 09:43
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/75505

Citation Data

Cited 9 times in Scopus. View in Scopus. Powered By Scopus® Data

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item