Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T06:32:19.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A simple, quick, validated method of recording the nasal cycle in humans using a subjective scale

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 November 2018

M R Williams  and
R Eccles
M R Williams*
Affiliation:
Deparment of ENT, James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK
R Eccles
Affiliation:
Common Cold Centre, Cardiff University, Wales, UK
*
Author for correspondence: Mr Mark Robert Williams, Dept. of ENT, James Cook University Hospital, Marton Rd, Middlesbrough TS4 3BW, UK E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Studies on the nasal cycle can be limited by time-consuming rhinomanometric measurements. However, quantifiable subjective assessment of nasal airflow has been limited by poor correlation with rhinomanometric data, even when investigating patients with a deviated nasal septum.

Methods

Thirty healthy participants attended two study days for rhinomanometric and subjective assessment of nasal airflow (using the subjective ordinal scale). A nasal partitioning ratio was calculated for both measures.

Results

Objective and subjective nasal partitioning ratios were compared; strong correlations were seen, with a correlation coefficient of 0.64 (p < 0.00001) on day 1 and 0.68 (p < 0.00001) on day 2.

Conclusion

The use of the subjective ordinal scale and nasal partitioning ratio provides a sensitive tool for assessing relative nasal airflow, with results that correlate strongly with rhinomanometric data. This finding strongly suggests that this combination could be used for future subjective assessment of the nasal cycle.

Keywords

RhinomanometryRhinometry, AcousticVisual Analog ScaleSelf-AssessmentNoseNasal Cavity
Type
Main Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 132 , Issue 12 , December 2018 , pp. 1067 - 1071
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited, 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Mr M R Williams takes responsibility for the integrity of the content of the paper

A summary of this work was presented orally at the 4th Congress of European ORL-HNS, 11 October 2017, Barcelona, Spain.

References

1Kayser, R. Exact measurement of the air conductance in the nose [in German]. Archiv fur Laryngol Rhinol 1895;3:101–20Google Scholar
2Davis, SS, Eccles, R. Nasal congestion: mechanisms, measurement and medications. Core information for the clinician. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2004;29:659–66Google Scholar
3Eccles, R. A guide to practical aspects of measurement of human nasal airflow by rhinomanometry. Rhinology 2011;49:2–10Google Scholar
4Roithmann, R, Cole, P, Chapnik, J, Shpirer, I, Hoffstein, V, Zamel, N. Acoustic rhinometry in the evaluation of nasal obstruction. Laryngoscope 1995;105:275–81Google Scholar
5Hanif, J, Eccles, R, Jawad, S. The use of a portable spirometer for studies on the nasal cycle. Am J Rhinol 2001;15:303–6Google Scholar
6Price, A, Eccles, R. Is there any relationship between right and left hand dominance and right and left nasal airflow dominance? J Laryngol Otol 2017;131:846–52Google Scholar
7Funk, E, Clarke, J. The nasal cycle. Observations over prolonged periods of time. Research Bulletin of the Himalayan International Institute 1980; Winter:1–3Google Scholar
8Eccles, R. Nasal airflow in health and disease. Acta Otolaryngol 2000;120:580–95Google Scholar
9Sen, I, Dutta, M, Haldar, D, Sinha, R. Estimation of partitioning of airflow in septal surgery: a prospective study with reference to the NOSE scale. Ear Nose Throat J 2017;96:E6–12Google Scholar
10Boyce, JM, Eccles, R. Assessment of subjective scales for selection of patients for nasal septal surgery. Clin Otolaryngol 2006;31:297–302Google Scholar
11Stoksted, P. The physiologic cycle of the nose under normal and pathologic conditions. Acta Otolaryngol 1952;42:175–9Google Scholar
12Fisher, EW, Palmer, CR, Lund, VJ. Monitoring fluctuations in nasal patency in children: acoustic rhinometry versus rhinohygrometry. J Laryngol Otol 1995;109:503–8Google Scholar
13Gungor, A, Moinuddin, R, Nelson, RH, Corey, JP. Detection of the nasal cycle with acoustic rhinometry: techniques and applications. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1999;120:238–47Google Scholar
14Hanif, J, Eccles, R, Jawad, S. The use of a portable spirometer for studies on the nasal cycle. Am J Rhinol 2001;15:303–6Google Scholar
15Roblin, DG, Eccles, R. Normal range for nasal partitioning of airflow determined by nasal spirometry in 100 healthy subjects. Am J Rhinol 2003;17:179–83Google Scholar