论文部分内容阅读
目的 :评估鼻声反射 (AR)在鼻塞患者鼻通气检查中的应用价值 ,并探讨其参数选择。方法 :对 36例因鼻病引起鼻塞的患者 (鼻病组 )及 2 0例无鼻病健康志愿者 (对照组 )进行AR测试 ,测算鼻腔平均截面积 (MNCA)、最小截面积 (MCA)、鼻腔容积 (NV)和鼻阻力 (NR) ,并进行统计学分析。结果 :对照组中 ,MNCA、MCA、NV、NR性别差异均无统计学意义 (P >0 .0 5 ) ,除NV(P <0 .0 5 )外侧别差异亦无统计学意义 (P >0 .0 5 ) ;鼻病组中鼻塞侧与非鼻塞侧各参数间差异无统计学意义 (P>0 .0 5 ) ;鼻病组中鼻塞侧与对照组比较 ,其中MCA和NR差异有统计学意义 (分别P <0 .0 1和P <0 .0 5 ) ;鼻病组中非鼻塞侧加对照组与鼻病组中鼻塞侧比较 ,其中MCA和NR差异有统计学意义 (分别P <0 .0 1和P <0 .0 5 )。结论 :AR对鼻通气状况有较客观的反映 ,其中MCA和NR对鼻塞状况的反映与患者的主观感受较为一致 ,可作为反映鼻通气状况的敏感指标。
PURPOSE: To evaluate the value of nasal reflection (AR) in the nasal examination of patients with nasal congestion, and to explore its parameter selection. Methods: Thirty-six patients with rhinospasm (rhinopathy group) and 20 healthy volunteers without rhinitis (control group) were included in this study. The mean nasal area (MNCA), minimum sectional area (MCA) , Nasal volume (NV) and nasal resistance (NR), and statistical analysis. Results: In the control group, there was no significant difference in the gender of MNCA, MCA, NV and NR (P> 0.05), except for NV (P <0.05) (P> 0 .0 5). There was no significant difference between the nasal obstruction group and the non-nasal obstruction group in nasal disease group (P> 0.05). The difference between MCA and NR in nasal obstruction group was significant Statistical significance (P <0.01 and P <0.05, respectively); Comparison of MCA and NR between nasal group and control group was significant P <0. 01 and P <0. 05). CONCLUSIONS: AR has an objective reflection of nasal ventilation. The response of MCA and NR to nasal obstruction is consistent with the subjective perception of patients, which can be used as a sensitive indicator of nasal ventilation.