Journal of voice : official journal of the Voice Foundation · 2012
Evaluation of dysphonic patients by general otolaryngologists.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cohen Seth M, Pitman Michael J, Noordzij J Pieter, Courey Mark
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the instruments used by general otolaryngologists to visualize the larynx, assess the perception of the instruments' capabilities, and understand their comfort diagnosing specific etiologies of dysphonia.
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey.
METHODS: One thousand randomly chosen general otolaryngologists from American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery were mailed a survey.
RESULTS: The response rate was 27.8%. Mean years in practice were 19.5. Mirror and fiberoptic laryngoscopy were most commonly used. Approximately 84.1% used stroboscopy and 33.7% reported laryngoscopy could assess vibration. Respondents were more comfortable diagnosing conditions with obvious laryngeal structural abnormalities compared with those without, such as central neurologic disorders (P≤0.001). Approximately 46.5% were concerned about overdiagnosing laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).
CONCLUSIONS: Although 84.1% of general otolaryngologists use stroboscopy, one-third may not appreciate the differences between stroboscopy and laryngoscopy. General otolaryngologists are less comfortable diagnosing voice disorders without obvious laryngeal structural abnormalities, and nearly 50% are concerned that they overdiagnose LPR.
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey.
METHODS: One thousand randomly chosen general otolaryngologists from American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery were mailed a survey.
RESULTS: The response rate was 27.8%. Mean years in practice were 19.5. Mirror and fiberoptic laryngoscopy were most commonly used. Approximately 84.1% used stroboscopy and 33.7% reported laryngoscopy could assess vibration. Respondents were more comfortable diagnosing conditions with obvious laryngeal structural abnormalities compared with those without, such as central neurologic disorders (P≤0.001). Approximately 46.5% were concerned about overdiagnosing laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).
CONCLUSIONS: Although 84.1% of general otolaryngologists use stroboscopy, one-third may not appreciate the differences between stroboscopy and laryngoscopy. General otolaryngologists are less comfortable diagnosing voice disorders without obvious laryngeal structural abnormalities, and nearly 50% are concerned that they overdiagnose LPR.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Attitude of Health PersonnelChi-Square DistributionClinical CompetenceCross-Sectional StudiesDiagnostic ErrorsDysphoniaFiber Optic TechnologyHealth Care SurveysHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansLaryngoscopyLarynxOtolaryngologyPractice Patterns, Physicians'Predictive Value of TestsRisk FactorsStroboscopySurveys and QuestionnairesVideo RecordingVoice Quality