In April 2016 Manchester eScholar was replaced by the University of Manchester’s new Research Information Management System, Pure. In the autumn the University’s research outputs will be available to search and browse via a new Research Portal. Until then the University’s full publication record can be accessed via a temporary portal and the old eScholar content is available to search and browse via this archive.

Evaluation of the importance of head and probe stabilisation in acoustic rhinometry.

Wilson A, Fowler SJ, Martin S, White P, Gardiner Q, Lipworth B

Rhinology. 2001;39( 2):93-7.

Access to files

Full-text and supplementary files are not available from Manchester eScholar. Use our list of Related resources to find this item elsewhere. Alternatively, request a copy from the Library's Document supply service.

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-stand methods were consistently less variable than the other methods. With examiner-performed method, this was significant (p < 0.05) versus head-rest and patient-held methods for both measures of minimum cross-sectional area. For nasal volume the examiner-performed method was significantly (p < 0.05) less variable than the head-rest method. In conclusion, examiner-performed acoustic rhinometry is more repeatable than combined head stabilisation and instrument fixation and therefore the use of a head-rest may be unnecessary. Instrument fixation or examiner performed test is also preferable to allowing the patient to position the probe. The repeatability of the probe-stand method was similar to the examiner-performed method.

Bibliographic metadata

Type of resource:
Content type:
Publication type:
Published date:
Journal title:
ISSN:
Place of publication:
Netherlands
Volume:
39( 2)
Start page:
93
End page:
7
Pagination:
93-7
Access state:
Active

Institutional metadata

University researcher(s):

Record metadata

Manchester eScholar ID:
uk-ac-man-scw:1d30795
Created:
2nd September, 2009, 13:42:23
Last modified:
2nd September, 2009, 13:42:23

Can we help?

The library chat service will be available from 11am-3pm Monday to Friday (excluding Bank Holidays). You can also email your enquiry to us.