Belarusian
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Laryngoscope 2018-Oct

Instruments evaluating the clinical findings of laryngopharyngeal reflux: A systematic review.

Перакладаць артыкулы могуць толькі зарэгістраваныя карыстальнікі
Увайсці / Зарэгістравацца
Спасылка захоўваецца ў буферы абмену
Jerome R Lechien
Antonio Schindler
Lisa G De Marrez
Abdul Latif Hamdan
Petros D Karkos
Bernard Harmegnies
Maria Rosaria Barillari
Camille Finck
Sven Saussez

Ключавыя словы

Рэферат

OBJECTIVE

To identify the instruments for evaluating the clinical findings (ICFs) of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) designed for use with regard to diagnosis and treatment effectiveness.

METHODS

The PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were used to search for subject headings following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. Three investigators retrieved relevant studies published between 1990 and 2018 describing the evolution of laryngopharyngeal findings throughout LPR treatment. Issues of clinical relevance, that is, LPR diagnosis, treatments, and signs assessed for diagnosis or as therapeutic outcomes, were assessed. The investigators also evaluated the psychometric properties (conceptual model, content validity, consistency, reliability, concordance, convergent validity, known-groups validity, responsiveness to change, and interpretability) of the ICF. The risk of bias was assessed with the tool of the Clarity Group and Evidence Partners.

RESULTS

The search identified 1,227 publications with a total of 4,735 LPR patients; of these studies, 53 met the inclusion criteria. Of these 53 studies, we identified 10 unvalidated and six validated ICFs. None of the validated ICFs included all the psychometric properties. The main identified deficiencies related to ICF psychometric validation included variable construct validity, disparate and uncertain reliabilities, and a lack of interpretability. The lack of consideration of certain LPR laryngeal and extralaryngeal signs is the main weakness of ICFs, biasing content, and construct validities.

CONCLUSIONS

The low specificity of LPR signs, the lack of consideration of many findings, and the absence of a gold standard for diagnosis constitute barriers to the further validation of these ICFs. Additional studies are needed to develop complete and reliable ICFs. Laryngoscope, 2018.

Далучайцеся да нашай
старонкі ў facebook

Самая поўная база дадзеных пра лекавыя травы, падтрыманая навукай

  • Працуе на 55 мовах
  • Лячэнне травой пры падтрымцы навукі
  • Распазнаванне траў па малюнку
  • Інтэрактыўная GPS-карта - пазначце травы па месцы (хутка)
  • Чытайце навуковыя публікацыі, звязаныя з вашым пошукам
  • Шукайце лекавыя зёлкі па іх уздзеянні
  • Арганізуйце свае інтарэсы і будзьце ў курсе навінавых даследаванняў, клінічных выпрабаванняў і патэнтаў

Увядзіце сімптом альбо захворванне і прачытайце пра зёлкі, якія могуць дапамагчы, набярыце траву і паглядзіце хваробы і сімптомы, супраць якіх яна выкарыстоўваецца.
* Уся інфармацыя заснавана на апублікаваных навуковых даследаваннях

Google Play badgeApp Store badge