Test-Retest Reliability of Respiratory Resistance Measured with the Airflow Perturbation Device

• Published in: Journal of speech, language, and hearing research language, and hearing research, 2014-08, Vol.57 (4), p.1323-1329
• Main Authors: Gallena, Sally K, Solomon, Nancy Pearl, Johnson, Arthur T, Vossoughi, Jafar, Tian, Wei
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adolescents; Adults; Airway Obstruction - diagnosis; Airway Obstruction - etiology; Airway Resistance - physiology; Athletes; Care and treatment; Case-Control Studies; Clinical outcomes; Correlation; Diagnosis; Equipment Design; Exercise - physiology; Exhalation - physiology; Experimental Groups; Female; Females; Handheld Devices; Human Body; Humans; Larynx; Measurement Equipment; Measurement Techniques; Outcomes of Treatment; Physiological aspects; Prospective Studies; Reproducibility of Results; Respiratory Function Tests - instrumentation; Respiratory Function Tests - standards; Speech disorders; Statistical Analysis; Test Reliability; Vocal Cord Dysfunction - complications; Vocal Cord Dysfunction - physiopathology; Vocal cords
• ISSN: 1092-4388; 1558-9102
• DOI: 10.1044/2014_JSLHR-S-13-0246

Purpose: In this study, the authors aimed to determine reliability of the airflow perturbation device (APD) to measure respiratory resistance within and across sessions during resting tidal (RTB) and postexercise breathing in healthy athletes, and during RTB across trials within a session in athletes with paradoxical vocal fold motion (PVFM) disorder. Method: Prospective, repeated-measures design. The APD measured respiratory resistance during 3 baseline assessments in 24 teenage female athletes, 12 with and 12 without PVFM. Control athletes provided data at rest and following a customized exercise challenge during each of 3 sessions. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis assessed strength of relationships, and repeated-measures analysis of variance assessed differences across trials and sessions. Results: ICC analyses confirmed strong correlations across RTB trials for inspiratory, expiratory, and mean respiratory resistance in both groups. Inspiratory resistance decreased ~5% between sessions for control participants; expiratory and mean respiratory resistances were stable. Data from control athletes across sessions and following rigorous exercise were strongly correlated when taken at comparable intervals. Conclusions: APD-measured respiratory resistance, including separate assessments for the inspiratory and expiratory phases, has strong test--retest reliability during RTB and after exercising. This suggests that the APD is a useful measurement tool for the assessment of airway function in patients suspected of having PVFM.