PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare a computerized tool to standard objective clinical scales for global and zone-specific assessment of facial nerve function. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of 77 patients with facial paralysis who underwent facial videography. Videos were independently scored by 3 facial nerve specialists using the House-Brackmann Scales (HBI and HBII). Digital scoring was performed with Facogram software. Scores were recorded and compared using intraclass and Pearson (r) correlations. RESULTS: Interobserver correlation was high with HBII, with overall scores in excellent agreement (intraclass correlation range, 0.78-0.95; P ≤ 0.0001). There were strong correlations between Facogram and HBII (r ≥ 0.67, P ≤ 0.0001) and strong intraobserver correlations between HBI and HBII (r ≥ 0.71, P ≤ 0.0001). The HBII required more clinician time [mean (SD), 72 (21) seconds per case], compared with Facogram, which did not require any clinician time. CONCLUSIONS: An automated, zone-specific facial analysis tool can eliminate clinician subjectivity and allow standardized assessment of facial paralysis.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare a computerized tool to standard objective clinical scales for global and zone-specific assessment of facial nerve function. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of 77 patients with facial paralysis who underwent facial videography. Videos were independently scored by 3 facial nerve specialists using the House-Brackmann Scales (HBI and HBII). Digital scoring was performed with Facogram software. Scores were recorded and compared using intraclass and Pearson (r) correlations. RESULTS: Interobserver correlation was high with HBII, with overall scores in excellent agreement (intraclass correlation range, 0.78-0.95; P ≤ 0.0001). There were strong correlations between Facogram and HBII (r ≥ 0.67, P ≤ 0.0001) and strong intraobserver correlations between HBI and HBII (r ≥ 0.71, P ≤ 0.0001). The HBII required more clinician time [mean (SD), 72 (21) seconds per case], compared with Facogram, which did not require any clinician time. CONCLUSIONS: An automated, zone-specific facial analysis tool can eliminate clinician subjectivity and allow standardized assessment of facial paralysis.
Authors: Jagdeep Singh Virk; Sonal Tripathi; Premjit S Randhawa; Elijah A Kwasa; Nigel D Mendoza; Jonathan Harcourt Journal: Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2014-03-25
Authors: Scott R Plotkin; Simone L Ardern-Holmes; Fred G Barker; Jaishri O Blakeley; D Gareth Evans; Rosalie E Ferner; Tessa A Hadlock; Chris Halpin Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-11-19 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Aurora G Vincent; Scott E Bevans; Jon M Robitschek; Gary G Wind; Marc H Hohman Journal: JAMA Facial Plast Surg Date: 2019-12-01 Impact factor: 4.611
Authors: Jonathan H Norris; Natasha M Longmire; Sarah Kilcoyne; David Johnson; Ray Fitzpatrick; Anne F Klassen Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2019-01-09
Authors: Leonard Knoedler; Helena Baecher; Martin Kauke-Navarro; Lukas Prantl; Hans-Günther Machens; Philipp Scheuermann; Christoph Palm; Raphael Baumann; Andreas Kehrer; Adriana C Panayi; Samuel Knoedler Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-08-25 Impact factor: 4.964