Nasal airflow resistance measurement: forced oscillation technique versus posterior rhinomanometry

This study was designed to determine whether nasal airflow resistance (Rn) which is nonlinear during tidal breathing, can be assessed by the forced oscillation (FO) technique. Rn values obtained by the FO technique and extrapolated to 0 Hz (Rn,FO) were compared to those assessed by posterior rhinomanometry at maximal tidal inspiratory flow (Rn,m), at a 0.5 L x s(-1) flow (Rn,F), and at a 1 hPa transnasal pressure (Rn,P). All Rn estimates were derived from the same inspiratory and expiratory nasal flow and transnasal pressure signals obtained during tidal nasal breathing whilst a forced flow was applied at the nose via a rigid nasal mask in 23 healthy volunteers, of whom 14 had additional measurements after vasoconstrictor treatment. In the basal state, no significant difference, and significant correlations (p<0.0001) were found between Rn,FO and the other Rn estimates. Only the regression line of Rn,FO versus Rn,m was not significantly different from the identity line. After nasal decongestion, Rn,P became significantly higher than the other Rn estimates (p<0.005). The regression line of Rn,FO versus Rn,m remained nonsignificantly different from the identity line. Similar results were observed regarding the percentage values of the different Rn estimates after decongestant treatment. This study shows that, despite its nonlinearity, Rn can be assessed by the FO technique, and that Rn,FO and Rn,m could be indifferently used as physiological indices of nasal patency. As the FO technique is more difficult to implement than the conventional rhinomanometry, its interest in rhinology appears not to be obvious.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G L Hall, Z Hantos, J H Wildhaber, and P D Sly Contribution of nasal pathways to low frequency respiratory impedance in infants Thorax, May 1, 2002; 57(5): 396 - 399. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]