Correlation between rhinometric measurement methods in healthy young adults.

The most common rhinometric measurement methods used in modern rhinology are acoustic rhinometry, rhinomanometry, and nasal peak expiratory flow (PEF) rate. In this prospective study, we wanted to clarifiy whether the parameters given by these three methods in the same subject support each other and can be used simultaneously in clinical practice. We also wanted to define the dimensions of normal nasal geometry and function based on these three methods. The rhinometric measurements were done in 249 healthy white subjects consisting of 171 women and 78 men. The geometry was analyzed with regard to body mass index (BMI) and smoking habits. The result could he used as some kind of reference value for the same kind of patient cohort as when rhinological pathology is investigated. The measurements obtained by acoustic rhinometry showed only statistically significant correlations between the measured volume and minimal cross-sectional area in the nasal cavities (r = 0.959). Rhinomanometry showed only a statistically significant correlation between the measured resistance in expiration and inspiration (r = 0.977). Acoustic rhinometry, rhinomanometry, and nasal PEF did not show any correlations and the BMI did not have any effect on the results. Although the smoking group was relatively small in this cohort, the rhinometric methods showed smaller nasal cavity volume, higher resistance, and lower nasal PEF values. Based on these results, we recommend the use of these three rhinometric methods as independent instruments in rhinological examinations. However, in the pathological nose, e.g., smokers, the methods show equal changes in measurements. It is important to measure at least acoustic rhinometry and rhinomanometry at the same time in clinical practice to achieve good quality of examinations.