Acoustic rhinometry in mouth breathing patients: a systematic review

Melo, Ana Carolina Cardoso de; Gomes, Adriana de Oliveira de Camargo; Cavalcanti, Arlene Santos; Silva, Hilton Justino da

doi:10.1016/j.bjorl.2014.12.007

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Review Article • Braz. j. otorhinolaryngol. 81 (2) • Apr 2015 • https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjorl.2014.12.007 copy

Acoustic rhinometry in mouth breathing patients: a systematic review ^☆ ☆ Please cite this article as: de Melo AC, Gomes AO, Cavalcanti AS, da Silva HJ. Acoustic rhinometry in mouth breathing patients: a systematic review. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2015;81:212-8. ^☆☆ ☆☆ Institution: Universidade Federal de Pernambuco (UFPE), Recife, PE, Brazil.

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

INTRODUCTION:

When there is a change in the physiological pattern of nasal breathing, mouth breathing may already be present. The diagnosis of mouth breathing is related to nasal patency. One way to access nasal patency is by acoustic rhinometry.

OBJECTIVE:

To systematically review the effectiveness of acoustic rhinometry for the diagnosis of patients with mouth breathing.

METHODS:

Electronic databases LILACS, MEDLINE via PubMed and Bireme, SciELO, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Science Direct, from August to December 2013, were consulted. 11,439 articles were found: 30 from LILACS, 54 from MEDLINE via Bireme, 5558 from MEDLINE via PubMed, 11 from SciELO, 2056 from Web of Science, 1734 from Scopus, 13 from PsycInfo, 1108 from CINAHL, and 875 from Science Direct. Of these, two articles were selected.

RESULTS:

The heterogeneity in the use of equipment and materials for the assessment of respiratory mode in these studies reveals that there is not yet consensus in the assessment and diagnosis of patients with mouth breathing.

CONCLUSION:

According to the articles, acoustic rhinometry has been used for almost twenty years, but controlled studies attesting to the efficacy of measuring the geometry of nasal cavities for complementary diagnosis of respiratory mode are warranted.

Acoustic rhinometry; Mouth breathing; Diagnosis; Nasal cavity

Crossings in English	Crossings in Spanish	Crossings in Portuguese
“Acoustic rhinometry” and “mouth breathing”	“Rinometría acústica” and “Respiración por la boca”	“Rinometria acústica” and “Respiração bucal”
“Acoustic rhinometry” and “diagnosis”	“Rinometría acústica” and “Diagnóstico”	“Rinometria acústica” and “Diagnóstico”
“Diagnosis” and “mouth breathing”	“Diagnóstico” and “Respiración por la boca”	“Diagnóstico” and “Respiração bucal”
“Nasal cavity” and “mouth breathing”	“Cavidad nasal” and “Respiración por la boca”	“Cavidade nasal” and “Respiração bucal”
“Nasal cavity” and “diagnosis”	“Cavidad nasal” and “Diagnóstico”	“Cavidade nasal” and “Diagnóstico”
“Nasal cavity” and “acoustic rhinometry”	“Cavidad nasal” and “Rinometría acústica”	“Cavidade nasal” and Rinometria acústica”

Articles and criteria	Zavras et al. (1994)	Fensterseifer et al. (2013)
1. Specified inclusion criteria	Yes	Yes
2. Control group	Yes	Yes
3. Random allocation	No	No
4. Confidentiality in allocation	No	No
5. “Blind” subjects	No	No
6. “Blind” therapists	No	No
7. Statistical analysis	Yes	Yes
8. Statistical comparison between groups	Yes	Yes

Author/year	Local	Study type	Sample	Equipment/methods used	Results
Zavras, White, Rich, Jackson/1994	Boston, USA	Quantitative descriptive analytical study	20 children: 10 predominantly mouth breathers; 10 nose breathers.	Breathing mode noted by the pediatric dentist.	In relation to the total volume of both nostrils, it was found that the values of the group of nose breathers (17.7 + 4.9 mL) were significantly higher than those of the group of mouth breathers (12.0 + 4.1 mL).
			Mean ages of the groups with oral and nasal breathing were 10.1 and 10.2 years, respectively.	Application of a questionnaire for the child's parents and/or guardians for obtaining information about medical/dental history and breathing mode.	No significant difference was observed between minimum cross-section areas.
				Evaluation of nasal cavities with acoustic rhinometry equipment (EK Electronics, Aarhus, Denmark).

Fensterseifer, Carpes, Weckx, Martha/2013	Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil	Case control study	48 children: 24 with nasal obstruction and learning difficulty. 24 children without learning difficulty, with and without nasal obstruction.	Evaluation of nasal breathing according to the “Protocol for the evaluation of children with learning disabilities.”	In comparing the two groups, nasal obstruction (p = 0.14) shows a trend to be higher in the group with learning difficulties.
			Ages between 8–12 years, with an average of 9.1 years.	Oroscopy, anterior rhinoscopy and cavum X-ray carried out.	Highly consistent relationship between learning disability and pharyngeal tonsil hypertrophy (p < 0.001).
				Acoustic rhinometry.	Size of nasal cavities; this association was not consistent (p = 0.75).

Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico-Facial. Sede da Associação Brasileira de Otorrinolaringologia e Cirurgia Cérvico Facial, Av. Indianópolia, 1287, 04063-002 São Paulo/SP Brasil, Tel.: (0xx11) 5053-7500, Fax: (0xx11) 5053-7512 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: revista@aborlccf.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] * Corresponding author. E-mail: carolyhcm@yahoo.com.br (A.C. Cardoso de Melo).