OBJECTIVES: To determine whether there are differences in patient preference and extent of laryngeal visualization between video rigid (30 degree endoscope) laryngoscopy (VRL) and laryngeal mirror examination (LME). STUDY DESIGN: A prospective comparison by patients undergoing laryngeal examination by both VRL and LME conducted by two examiners experienced in both mirror and rigid video endoscopy. METHODS: Forty-three patients had laryngeal examination by both VRL and LME in alternating order. Patients were instructed to observe their exam on a monitor screen during the rigid exam. At the conclusioon of both laryngeal examinations, patients were asked to rank comfort and level of gagging on a 1 to 10 scale for both VRL and LME, as well as preference between the two methods and whether seeing their laryngeal examination on the video screen was helpful. The extent of laryngeal visualization by the clinician was recorded for each examination. RESULTS:Patient comfort level was greater with VRL (P < .001) and gagging was significantly less with VRL (P < .001) compared to LME. VRL provided a more complete examination of the larynx by the clinician (P < .001) compared to LME. Patient preference significantly favored VRL (79.1%) compared to LME (18.4%) and 2.3% had no preference (P < .001) A total of 83.7% found visualization of laryngeal exam on the monitor during the VRL helpful. CONCLUSIONS:VRL is superior to LME for most patients based on comfort, extent of laryngeal examination by the clinician, and patient preference. The majority of patients found visualization of their laryngeal examination during VRL to be helpful.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether there are differences in patient preference and extent of laryngeal visualization between video rigid (30 degree endoscope) laryngoscopy (VRL) and laryngeal mirror examination (LME). STUDY DESIGN: A prospective comparison by patients undergoing laryngeal examination by both VRL and LME conducted by two examiners experienced in both mirror and rigid video endoscopy. METHODS: Forty-three patients had laryngeal examination by both VRL and LME in alternating order. Patients were instructed to observe their exam on a monitor screen during the rigid exam. At the conclusioon of both laryngeal examinations, patients were asked to rank comfort and level of gagging on a 1 to 10 scale for both VRL and LME, as well as preference between the two methods and whether seeing their laryngeal examination on the video screen was helpful. The extent of laryngeal visualization by the clinician was recorded for each examination. RESULTS:Patient comfort level was greater with VRL (P < .001) and gagging was significantly less with VRL (P < .001) compared to LME. VRL provided a more complete examination of the larynx by the clinician (P < .001) compared to LME. Patient preference significantly favored VRL (79.1%) compared to LME (18.4%) and 2.3% had no preference (P < .001) A total of 83.7% found visualization of laryngeal exam on the monitor during the VRL helpful. CONCLUSIONS:VRL is superior to LME for most patients based on comfort, extent of laryngeal examination by the clinician, and patient preference. The majority of patients found visualization of their laryngeal examination during VRL to be helpful.