| Literature DB >> 28765826 |
Emil Schwarz Walsted1,2, James H Hull2, Jeppe Hvedstrup1, Robert Christiaan Maat3, Vibeke Backer1.
Abstract
The current gold-standard method for diagnosing exercise-induced laryngeal obstruction (EILO) is continuous laryngoscopy during exercise (CLE), with severity classified by a visual grade scoring system. We evaluated the precision of this approach, by evaluating test-retest reliability of CLE and both inter- and intra-rater variability. In this prospective case-control study, subjects completed four consecutive treadmill CLE tests under identical conditions. Laryngoscopic video recordings were anonymised and graded by three expert raters. 2 months following initial scoring, videos were re-randomised and rating repeated to assess intra-rater agreement. 20 subjects (16 cases and four controls) completed four CLE tests. The time to exhaustion increased by 30 s (95% CI 0.02-57.8, p<0.05) in the second CLE compared with the first test, but remained identical in the subsequent tests. Only one-third of subjects retained their initial diagnosis in the subsequent three tests. Inter-rater agreement on grade scores (weighted Cohen's ϰ) was 0.16-0.45, while intra-rater agreement ranged from 0.30 to 0.67. The CLE test is key in the diagnostic assessment of patients with EILO. However, the widely adopted visual grade scoring system does not appear to be a robust means for reliably classifying severity of EILO.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28765826 PMCID: PMC5532755 DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00070-2017
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ERJ Open Res ISSN: 2312-0541
FIGURE 1The grading system illustrated by photographic images of the larynx showing the different grades of laryngeal obstruction at the glottic and supraglottic levels. #: the scores at each level (glottic (A and C) and supraglottic (B and D)) were assessed at moderate (A, B) (when the subject started to run) and at maximal (C, D) (just before the subject stopped running on the treadmill) effort; all four levels (A–D) were noted together with a sum score (E) for each test/subject. Reproduced from [11] with permission from the publisher.
Subject characteristics
| Female | 19 (83) |
| Male | 4 (17) |
| 23 (15–45) | |
| 21.1 (4.6) | |
| 3.50 (1.2) | |
| 98.7 (25) | |
| 4.30 (1.2) | |
| 103.3 (26.1) |
Data are presented as median (interquartile range), unless otherwise stated. FEV1: forced expiratory volume in 1 s; FVC: forced vital capacity.
FIGURE 2Diagnostic implications: one or more changes in exercise-induced laryngeal obstruction diagnosis (i.e. having or not having clinically significant laryngeal obstruction at either the glottic or the supraglottic level) over the course of the four tests. In a secondary analysis, the first test was excluded from analysis to depict implications due to intra-rater and test–retest variation only (i.e. excluding any learning effect; see also figure 3).
FIGURE 3Learning effect on test duration. Data are presented as predicted means±se from a linear mixed model of group and time as predictors of test duration. EILO: exercise-induced laryngeal obstruction. *: p<0.05.
Test–retest reliability of exercise-induced laryngeal obstruction grade scores and time to onset
| 0.49 (0.32–0.67) | 0.52 (0.35–0.70) | 0.40 (0.23–0.57) | ||||
| 0.31 (0.07–0.55) | 0.45 (0.25–0.65) | 0.58 (0.41–0.76) | ||||
| 0.61 (0.37–0.77) | 0.86 (0.73–0.92) | 0.79 (0.61–0.89) | ||||
ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient (2,1), single measures.
Inter-rater agreement on exercise-induced laryngeal obstruction grade scores and time to onset
| 0.16 (0.03–0.29) | 0.45 (0.30–0.59) | 0.16 (0.08–0.25) | ||||
| 0.42 (0.27–0.57) | 0.40 (0.20–0.60) | 0.30 (0.15–0.44) | ||||
| 0.54 (0.29–0.72) | 0.56 (0.00–0.80) | 0.55 (0.36–0.70) | ||||
ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient (2,1), single measures.
Intra-rater agreement on exercise-induced laryngeal obstruction grade scores and time to onset
| 0.30 (0.10–0.49) | 0.41 (0.27–0.55) | 0.45 (0.23–0.62) | |
| 0.48 (0.31–0.64) | 0.56 (0.40–0.71) | 0.85 (0.74–0.92) | |
| 0.67 (0.56–0.79) | 0.43 (0.23–0.63) | 0.43 (0.22–0.60) | |
| 0.58 (0.49–0.66) | 0.48 (0.39–0.57) | 0.51 (0.39–0.61) |
ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient (2,1), single measures.