Validation of polyvinylidene fluoride nasal sensor to assess nasal obstruction in comparison with subjective technique

• Published in: American journal of otolaryngology 2015-03, Vol.36 (2), p.122-129
• Main Authors: Roopa Manjunatha, G., PhD, Roy Mahapatra, D., PhD, Prakash, Surya, MD, Rajanna, K., PhD
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Air flow; Analysis of Variance; Case-Control Studies; Diagnostic Techniques, Respiratory System - instrumentation; Equipment Design; Female; Humans; Male; Methods; Middle Aged; Nasal Cavity - physiopathology; Nasal Obstruction - diagnosis; Nasal Obstruction - physiopathology; Nose; Otolaryngology; Patients; Polyvinyls; Reference Values; Respiration; Rhinomanometry - instrumentation; Rhinomanometry - methods; Sensors; Surgery; Transducers; Visual Analog Scale
• ISSN: 0196-0709; 1532-818X
• DOI: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2014.09.002

Abstract Objective The aim of this study is to validate the applicability of the PolyVinyliDene Fluoride (PVDF) nasal sensor to assess the nasal airflow, in healthy subjects and patients with nasal obstruction and to correlate the results with the score of Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Methods PVDF nasal sensor and VAS measurements were carried out in 50 subjects (25-healthy subjects and 25 patients). The VAS score of nasal obstruction and peak-to-peak amplitude ( Vp-p ) of nasal cycle measured by PVDF nasal sensors were analyzed for right nostril (RN) and left nostril (LN) in both the groups. Spearman's rho correlation was calculated. The relationship between PVDF nasal sensor measurements and severity of nasal obstruction (VAS score) were assessed by ANOVA. Results In healthy group, the measurement of nasal airflow by PVDF nasal sensor for RN and LN were found to be 51.14 ± 5.87% and 48.85 ± 5.87%, respectively. In patient group, PVDF nasal sensor indicated lesser nasal airflow in the blocked nostrils (RN: 23.33 ± 10.54% and LN: 32.24 ± 11.54%). Moderate correlation was observed in healthy group ( r = − 0.710, p < 0.001 for RN and r = − 0.651, p < 0.001 for LN), and moderate to strong correlation in patient group ( r = − 0.751, p < 0.01 for RN and r = − 0.885, p < 0.0001 for LN). Conclusion PVDF nasal sensor method is a newly developed technique for measuring the nasal airflow. Moderate to strong correlation was observed between PVDF nasal sensor data and VAS scores for nasal obstruction. In our present study, PVDF nasal sensor technique successfully differentiated between healthy subjects and patients with nasal obstruction. Additionally, it can also assess severity of nasal obstruction in comparison with VAS. Thus, we propose that the PVDF nasal sensor technique could be used as a new diagnostic method to evaluate nasal obstruction in routine clinical practice.