caa a22 4500 606182624 CHVBK 20210128100817.0 cr unu---uuuuu 210128e20150101xx s 000 0 eng 10.1007/s00405-014-3083-6 doi (NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/s00405-014-3083-6 Comparison of the classic and Broms methods of rhinomanometry using model noses [Elektronische Daten] [Eugene Wong, Ron Eccles] Calculation of nasal airway resistance (NAR) using rhinomanometry can be obtained using different methods of analysis of the pressure-flow curve. The two commonest methods for measuring NAR in rhinomanometry are the classic method at 75 and 150Pa and the Broms method at radius 200. The objectiveof this study was to compare the unilateral NAR values measured using both classic and Broms method over four artificial model noses (R1, R2, R3 and R4). The study found that at low resistances (R1 and R2), NAR measurements of Broms were not significantly different from measurements of classic method at 75Pa but were significantly different from measurements of classic method at 150Pa. At high resistances (R3 and R4), NAR measurements of Broms were not significantly different from measurements of classic method at 150Pa but were significantly different from measurements of classic method at 75Pa. The magnitude of any change in resistance due to surgery or medical intervention is therefore also dependent on the method used to analyze the pressure-flow curves, with bigger change observed in Broms method at certain level of nasal resistances compared to classic measurements in the same patient.In conclusion, nasal airway resistance is not a standardized measurement like blood pressure. Clinicians need to be careful when comparing unilateral measurements of resistance from the classic and Broms methods because the two methods can give either similar or different measurements depending on the level of nasal resistance. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2014 Classic nationallicence Broms nationallicence Comparison nationallicence Rhinomanometry nationallicence Wong Eugene Common Cold Centre and Healthcare Clinical Trials, Cardiff School of Biosciences, Cardiff University, CF10 3AX, Cardiff, Wales, UK aut Eccles Ron Common Cold Centre and Healthcare Clinical Trials, Cardiff School of Biosciences, Cardiff University, CF10 3AX, Cardiff, Wales, UK aut European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Springer Berlin Heidelberg 272/1(2015-01-01), 105-110 0937-4477 272:1<105 2015 272 405 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-014-3083-6 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI BK010053 XK010053 XK010000 Metadata rights reserved Springer special CC-BY-NC licence nationallicence 1 research-article jats NATIONALLICENCE NATIONALLICENCE NL-springer NATIONALLICENCE 856 40 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-014-3083-6 text/html Onlinezugriff via DOI NATIONALLICENCE 700 1- Wong Eugene Common Cold Centre and Healthcare Clinical Trials, Cardiff School of Biosciences, Cardiff University, CF10 3AX, Cardiff, Wales, UK aut NATIONALLICENCE 700 1- Eccles Ron Common Cold Centre and Healthcare Clinical Trials, Cardiff School of Biosciences, Cardiff University, CF10 3AX, Cardiff, Wales, UK aut NATIONALLICENCE 773 0- European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology Springer Berlin Heidelberg 272/1(2015-01-01), 105-110 0937-4477 272:1<105 2015 272 405