Search

Objectives: First, establishment and validation of a novel questionnaire documenting the burden of xerostomia and sialadenitis symptoms, including quality of life. Second, to compare two versions regarding the answering scale (proposed developed answers Q3 vs. 0–10 visual analogue scale Q10) of our newly developed questionnaire, in order to evaluate their comprehension by patients and their reproducibility in time. Study Design: The study is a systematic review regarding the evaluation of the existing questionnaire and a cohort study regarding the validation of our new MSGS questionnaire. Materials and Methods: A Multidisciplinary Salivary Gland Society (MSGS) questionnaire consisting of 20 questions and two scoring systems was developed to quantify symptoms of dry mouth and sialadenitis. Validation of the questionnaire was carried out on 199 patients with salivary pathologies (digestive, nasal, or age‐related xerostomia, post radiation therapy, post radioiodine therapy, Sjögren's syndrome, IgG4 disease, recurrent juvenile parotitis, stones, and strictures) and a control group of 66 healthy volunteers. The coherence of the questionnaire's items, its reliability to distinguish patients from healthy volunteers, its comparison with unstimulated sialometry, and the time to fill both versions were assessed. Results: The novel MSGS questionnaire showed good internal coherence of the items, indicating its pertinence: the scale reliability coefficients amounted to a Cronbach's alpha of 0.92 for Q10 and 0.90 for Q3. The time to complete Q3 and Q10 amounted, respectively, to 5.23 min (±2.3 min) and 5.65 min (±2.64 min) for patients and to 3.94 min (±3.94 min) and 3.75 min (±2.11 min) for healthy volunteers. The difference between Q3 and Q10 was not significant. Conclusion: We present a novel self‐administered questionnaire quantifying xerostomia and non‐tumoral salivary gland pathologies. We recommend the use of the Q10 version, as its scale type is well known in the literature and it translation for international use will be more accurate. Laryngoscope, 132:322–331, 2022 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess interobserver agreement and intraobserver reproducibility when assessing the nasopharynx for malignancy under white light and narrow band imaging endoscopy because the decision to biopsy hinges on the examiner's perceived chance of malignancy.Methods: An interobserver and intraobserver agreement study utilizing white light and narrow band endoscopic images of the nasopharynx. The setting was an academic referral hospital. Participants were 156 adults with suspected nasopharyngeal carcinoma who underwent white light and narrow band imaging endoscopy and biopsy. Images of the nasopharynges were subsequently scored for malignancy by four otolaryngologists. The nasopharynx was scored on 4-point scales under white light and narrow band imaging endoscopy for the likelihood of malignancy or abnormality, respectively.Results: Intraclass correlation coefficients for intraobserver agreement for nasopharyngeal malignancy for four observers under white light were 0.86, 0.89, 0.79 and 0.88 (mean 0.855), respectively; and under narrow band imaging they were 0.64, 0.68, 0.64, and 0.66 (mean 0.655), respectively (all P values < 0.001). The coefficient for interobserver reliability under white light was 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76-0.82; P < 0.001), which indicated strong agreement. The coefficient for interobserver reliability under narrow band imaging was 0.56 (95% CI 0.50-0.61; P < 0.001), which indicated moderate agreement.Conclusions: Intraobserver and interobserver agreement for nasopharyngeal malignancy was strong on white light endoscopy but only moderate on narrow band imaging endoscopy. Agreement may be improved by adopting a standard set of assessment guidelines, including an objective detailed morphological analysis under white light and vasculature analysis under narrow band imaging.Level Of Evidence: 2a Laryngoscope, 129:1374-1379, 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Otolaryngology -- Head & Neck Surgery is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective: To determine the reproducibility of the Brodsky grading scale and the modified 3-grade and 5-grade scales in reporting the size of the tonsils., Design: Retrospective review of 60 video recordings of tonsil examination by 12 independent observers with different clinical backgrounds and various levels of training. The sizes of the tonsils were graded using different grading scales., Setting: Tertiary care university hospital., Participants: The video recordings were chosen from an ongoing epidemiologic study of sleep-related breathing disorder in children in Hong Kong. Main Outcomes Measures The intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility of each grading scale was determined using intraclass correlation. An intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) exceeding 0.75 was set a priori to indicate an acceptable level of reliability., Results: The mean intraobserver ICCs for the Brodsky grading scale and the modified 3-grade and 5-grade scales were 0.858, 0.830, and 0.865, respectively. The mean interobserver ICCs for the Brodsky grading scale and the modified 3-grade and 5-grade scales were 0.763, 0.739, and 0.783, respectively., Conclusion: The Brodsky grading scale and the modified 5-grade scale achieved acceptable intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility.