OBJECTIVES: We have analyzed the correlation between the House-Brackmann (HB) scale and Facial Nerve Grading System 2.0 (FNGS 2.0) in patients with Bell palsy, and evaluated the usefulness of the new grading system. METHODS: Sixty patients diagnosed with Bell palsy from May 2009 to December 2010 were evaluated using the HB scale and FNGS 2.0 scale during their initial visit, and after 3 and 6 weeks and 3 months. RESULTS: The overall intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.908 (P=0.000) and the Spearman correlation coefficient (SCC) was 0.912 (P<0.05). ICC and SCC displayed differences over time, being 0.604 and 0.626, respectively, at first visit; 0.834 and 0.843, respectively, after 3 weeks; 0.844 and 0.848, respectively, after 6 weeks; and 0.808 and 0.793, respectively, after 3 months. There was a significant difference in full recovery, depending on the scale used (HB, P=0.000; FNGS 2.0, P<0.05). The exact agreements between regional assessment and FNGS 2.0 for the mouth, eyes, and brow were 72%, 63%, and 52%, respectively. CONCLUSION: FNGS 2.0 shows moderate agreement with HB grading. Regional assessment, rather than HB grading, yields stricter evaluation, resulting in better prognosis and determination of grade.
OBJECTIVES: We have analyzed the correlation between the House-Brackmann (HB) scale and Facial Nerve Grading System 2.0 (FNGS 2.0) in patients with Bell palsy, and evaluated the usefulness of the new grading system. METHODS: Sixty patients diagnosed with Bell palsy from May 2009 to December 2010 were evaluated using the HB scale and FNGS 2.0 scale during their initial visit, and after 3 and 6 weeks and 3 months. RESULTS: The overall intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.908 (P=0.000) and the Spearman correlation coefficient (SCC) was 0.912 (P<0.05). ICC and SCC displayed differences over time, being 0.604 and 0.626, respectively, at first visit; 0.834 and 0.843, respectively, after 3 weeks; 0.844 and 0.848, respectively, after 6 weeks; and 0.808 and 0.793, respectively, after 3 months. There was a significant difference in full recovery, depending on the scale used (HB, P=0.000; FNGS 2.0, P<0.05). The exact agreements between regional assessment and FNGS 2.0 for the mouth, eyes, and brow were 72%, 63%, and 52%, respectively. CONCLUSION: FNGS 2.0 shows moderate agreement with HB grading. Regional assessment, rather than HB grading, yields stricter evaluation, resulting in better prognosis and determination of grade.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bell palsy; Facial Nerve Grading System 2.0; House-Brackmann scale
Authors: Jeffrey T Vrabec; Douglas D Backous; Hamid R Djalilian; Paul W Gidley; John P Leonetti; Sam J Marzo; Daniel Morrison; Matthew Ng; Mitchell J Ramsey; Barry M Schaitkin; Eric Smouha; Elizabeth H Toh; Mark K Wax; Robert A Williamson; E O'Brian Smith Journal: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 3.497