Laryngoscopy of vocal fold paralysis: Evaluation of consistency of clinical findings

David Rosow, Lucian Sulica

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives/Hypothesis: Laryngoscopy is the principal tool for the clinical assessment of vocal fold paralysis (VFP). Yet no consistent, unified vocabulary to describe laryngoscopic findings exists, compromising the evaluation and comparison of cases, outcomes, and treatment. The goal of this investigation was to evaluate laryngoscopic findings in VFP for inter- and intra-rater consistency. Study Design: Prospective survey-based study. Methods: Half-minute excerpts from stroboscopic exams of 22 patients with VFP were mailed to 22 fellowship-trained laryngologists. Each reviewer was sent exams in randomized order, with three random repeats included to determine intra-rater reliability. Twelve laryngoscopic criteria were assessed and recorded on preprinted sheets. Eleven criteria were binary in nature (yes/no); glottic insufficiency was rated on a four-point scale (none/mild/moderate/severe). Raters were blinded to clinical history, each other's ratings, and to their own previous ratings. Inter-rater agreement was calculated by Fleiss' kappa. Results: Twenty reviewers (91%) replied. Intrarater reliability by reviewer ranged from 66% to 100% and by laryngoscopic criterion from 77% to 100%. Of the laryngoscopic criteria used, glottic insufficiency (κ = 0.55), vocal fold bowing (κ = 0.49), and salivary pooling (κ = 0.45) showed moderate agreement between reviewers. Arytenoid stability (κ = 0.1), arytenoid position (κ = 0.12), and vocal fold height mismatch (κ = 0.12) showed poor agreement. The remainder showed slight to fair agreement. Conclusions: Inter-rater agreement on commonly used laryngoscopic criteria is generally fair to poor. Glottic insufficiency, vocal fold bowing, and salivary pooling demonstrated the most agreement among responding laryngologists. These findings suggest a need for a standardized descriptive scheme for laryngoscopic findings in VFP.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1376-1382
Number of pages7
JournalLaryngoscope
Volume120
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2010
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Laryngoscopy
Vocal Cords
Paralysis
Tongue
Vocabulary
Prospective Studies

Keywords

  • Agreement
  • Laryngoscopy
  • Reliability
  • Vocal cord paralysis
  • Vocal fold paralysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Laryngoscopy of vocal fold paralysis : Evaluation of consistency of clinical findings. / Rosow, David; Sulica, Lucian.

In: Laryngoscope, Vol. 120, No. 7, 01.07.2010, p. 1376-1382.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{3ce63a208089477587ba97aeadb8f26d,
title = "Laryngoscopy of vocal fold paralysis: Evaluation of consistency of clinical findings",
abstract = "Objectives/Hypothesis: Laryngoscopy is the principal tool for the clinical assessment of vocal fold paralysis (VFP). Yet no consistent, unified vocabulary to describe laryngoscopic findings exists, compromising the evaluation and comparison of cases, outcomes, and treatment. The goal of this investigation was to evaluate laryngoscopic findings in VFP for inter- and intra-rater consistency. Study Design: Prospective survey-based study. Methods: Half-minute excerpts from stroboscopic exams of 22 patients with VFP were mailed to 22 fellowship-trained laryngologists. Each reviewer was sent exams in randomized order, with three random repeats included to determine intra-rater reliability. Twelve laryngoscopic criteria were assessed and recorded on preprinted sheets. Eleven criteria were binary in nature (yes/no); glottic insufficiency was rated on a four-point scale (none/mild/moderate/severe). Raters were blinded to clinical history, each other's ratings, and to their own previous ratings. Inter-rater agreement was calculated by Fleiss' kappa. Results: Twenty reviewers (91{\%}) replied. Intrarater reliability by reviewer ranged from 66{\%} to 100{\%} and by laryngoscopic criterion from 77{\%} to 100{\%}. Of the laryngoscopic criteria used, glottic insufficiency (κ = 0.55), vocal fold bowing (κ = 0.49), and salivary pooling (κ = 0.45) showed moderate agreement between reviewers. Arytenoid stability (κ = 0.1), arytenoid position (κ = 0.12), and vocal fold height mismatch (κ = 0.12) showed poor agreement. The remainder showed slight to fair agreement. Conclusions: Inter-rater agreement on commonly used laryngoscopic criteria is generally fair to poor. Glottic insufficiency, vocal fold bowing, and salivary pooling demonstrated the most agreement among responding laryngologists. These findings suggest a need for a standardized descriptive scheme for laryngoscopic findings in VFP.",
keywords = "Agreement, Laryngoscopy, Reliability, Vocal cord paralysis, Vocal fold paralysis",
author = "David Rosow and Lucian Sulica",
year = "2010",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/lary.20945",
language = "English",
volume = "120",
pages = "1376--1382",
journal = "Laryngoscope",
issn = "0023-852X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Laryngoscopy of vocal fold paralysis

T2 - Evaluation of consistency of clinical findings

AU - Rosow, David

AU - Sulica, Lucian

PY - 2010/7/1

Y1 - 2010/7/1

N2 - Objectives/Hypothesis: Laryngoscopy is the principal tool for the clinical assessment of vocal fold paralysis (VFP). Yet no consistent, unified vocabulary to describe laryngoscopic findings exists, compromising the evaluation and comparison of cases, outcomes, and treatment. The goal of this investigation was to evaluate laryngoscopic findings in VFP for inter- and intra-rater consistency. Study Design: Prospective survey-based study. Methods: Half-minute excerpts from stroboscopic exams of 22 patients with VFP were mailed to 22 fellowship-trained laryngologists. Each reviewer was sent exams in randomized order, with three random repeats included to determine intra-rater reliability. Twelve laryngoscopic criteria were assessed and recorded on preprinted sheets. Eleven criteria were binary in nature (yes/no); glottic insufficiency was rated on a four-point scale (none/mild/moderate/severe). Raters were blinded to clinical history, each other's ratings, and to their own previous ratings. Inter-rater agreement was calculated by Fleiss' kappa. Results: Twenty reviewers (91%) replied. Intrarater reliability by reviewer ranged from 66% to 100% and by laryngoscopic criterion from 77% to 100%. Of the laryngoscopic criteria used, glottic insufficiency (κ = 0.55), vocal fold bowing (κ = 0.49), and salivary pooling (κ = 0.45) showed moderate agreement between reviewers. Arytenoid stability (κ = 0.1), arytenoid position (κ = 0.12), and vocal fold height mismatch (κ = 0.12) showed poor agreement. The remainder showed slight to fair agreement. Conclusions: Inter-rater agreement on commonly used laryngoscopic criteria is generally fair to poor. Glottic insufficiency, vocal fold bowing, and salivary pooling demonstrated the most agreement among responding laryngologists. These findings suggest a need for a standardized descriptive scheme for laryngoscopic findings in VFP.

AB - Objectives/Hypothesis: Laryngoscopy is the principal tool for the clinical assessment of vocal fold paralysis (VFP). Yet no consistent, unified vocabulary to describe laryngoscopic findings exists, compromising the evaluation and comparison of cases, outcomes, and treatment. The goal of this investigation was to evaluate laryngoscopic findings in VFP for inter- and intra-rater consistency. Study Design: Prospective survey-based study. Methods: Half-minute excerpts from stroboscopic exams of 22 patients with VFP were mailed to 22 fellowship-trained laryngologists. Each reviewer was sent exams in randomized order, with three random repeats included to determine intra-rater reliability. Twelve laryngoscopic criteria were assessed and recorded on preprinted sheets. Eleven criteria were binary in nature (yes/no); glottic insufficiency was rated on a four-point scale (none/mild/moderate/severe). Raters were blinded to clinical history, each other's ratings, and to their own previous ratings. Inter-rater agreement was calculated by Fleiss' kappa. Results: Twenty reviewers (91%) replied. Intrarater reliability by reviewer ranged from 66% to 100% and by laryngoscopic criterion from 77% to 100%. Of the laryngoscopic criteria used, glottic insufficiency (κ = 0.55), vocal fold bowing (κ = 0.49), and salivary pooling (κ = 0.45) showed moderate agreement between reviewers. Arytenoid stability (κ = 0.1), arytenoid position (κ = 0.12), and vocal fold height mismatch (κ = 0.12) showed poor agreement. The remainder showed slight to fair agreement. Conclusions: Inter-rater agreement on commonly used laryngoscopic criteria is generally fair to poor. Glottic insufficiency, vocal fold bowing, and salivary pooling demonstrated the most agreement among responding laryngologists. These findings suggest a need for a standardized descriptive scheme for laryngoscopic findings in VFP.

KW - Agreement

KW - Laryngoscopy

KW - Reliability

KW - Vocal cord paralysis

KW - Vocal fold paralysis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77954420637&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77954420637&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/lary.20945

DO - 10.1002/lary.20945

M3 - Article

C2 - 20564722

AN - SCOPUS:77954420637

VL - 120

SP - 1376

EP - 1382

JO - Laryngoscope

JF - Laryngoscope

SN - 0023-852X

IS - 7

ER -