Using RSI and RFS scores to differentiate between reflux-related and other causes of chronic laryngitis

Eckley, Claudia Alessandra; Tangerina, Rodrigo de Paiva

doi:10.1016/j.bjorl.2021.08.003

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(90 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar to symptoms, findings are non-specific and may be found in many inflammatory diseases of the upper aerodigestive tract mucosa. 66 The non-specificity of signs supports the interest in using clinical instruments to assess LPR. 67 In 2001, Belafsky et al, developed the reflux finding score (RFS), which considers most laryngeal signs.…”

Section: Findings Of Lpr (Statements 14-17)mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Dubai Definition and Diagnostic Criteria of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux: The IFOS Consensus

Lechien,

Vaezi,

Chan

et al. 2023

The Laryngoscope

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe objective of this work was to gather an international consensus group to propose a global definition and diagnostic approach of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) to guide primary care and specialist physicians in the management of LPR.MethodsForty‐eight international experts (otolaryngologists, gastroenterologists, surgeons, and physiologists) were included in a modified Delphi process to revise 48 statements about definition, clinical presentation, and diagnostic approaches to LPR. Three voting rounds determined a consensus statement to be acceptable when 80% of experts agreed with a rating of at least 8/10. Votes were anonymous and the analyses of voting rounds were performed by an independent statistician.ResultsAfter the third round, 79.2% of statements (N = 38/48) were approved. LPR was defined as a disease of the upper aerodigestive tract resulting from the direct and/or indirect effects of gastroduodenal content reflux, inducing morphological and/or neurological changes in the upper aerodigestive tract. LPR is associated with recognized non‐specific laryngeal and extra‐laryngeal symptoms and signs that can be evaluated with validated patient‐reported outcome questionnaires and clinical instruments. The hypopharyngeal–esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance–pH testing can suggest the diagnosis of LPR when there is >1 acid, weakly acid or nonacid hypopharyngeal reflux event in 24 h.ConclusionA global consensus definition for LPR is presented to improve detection and diagnosis of the disease for otolaryngologists, pulmonologists, gastroenterologists, surgeons, and primary care practitioners. The approved statements are offered to improve collaborative research by adopting common and validated diagnostic approaches to LPR.Level of Evidence5 Laryngoscope, 2023

show abstract

Section: Findings Of Lpr (Statements 14-17)mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Dubai Definition and Diagnostic Criteria of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux: The IFOS Consensus

Lechien,

Vaezi,

Chan

et al. 2023

The Laryngoscope

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite its widespread use, the RSI is still stuck in suboptimal specificity and sensitivity. Eckley et al 11 used the RSI and RFS to identify allergic rhinitis, sleep disorders, and reflux pharyngitis finding that the differences in scores were not statistically significant, which suggested that the RSI is not specific enough for the screening diagnosis of LPR. A study 12 by Wang et al showed that the sensitivity of RSI was only 15.9%.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Reflux Symptom Score versus Reflux Symptom Index in screening laryngopharyngeal reflux

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo compare the screening value of the Reflux Symptom Score (RSS) and the Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) for laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).MethodsAll included patients attending the Department of Otolaryngology at the Sixth Medical Center of the PLA General Hospital from February 2022 to August 2022, completed the RSS and the RSI and underwent 24‐hour hypopharyngeal‐esophageal multichannel intraluminal impedance‐pH (24 h HEMII‐pH) monitoring. The results of 24 h HEMII‐pH were used as a diagnostic criterion for LPR, consistency between two questionnaires (RSS, RSI) and 24 h HEMII‐pH was compared by the weighted Cohen's kappa statistic and the screening value of RSS and RSI for LPR was compared by receiver operating characteristics analysis.ResultsA total of 77 patients, 58 males, and 19 females, were included. The Kappa values of between RSS, RSI, and 24 h HEMII‐pH were 0.663 (p < 0.001) and 0.213 (p < 0.05), respectively. The sensitivity of RSS and RSI were 92.8% and 48.2%, respectively, the specificity was 71.4% and 80.9%. The negative predictive value and positive predictive value of RSI were 36.9%, 87.1%, and that of RSS were 78.9%, 89.6%. The area under curve of the RSS (0.783; 95% CI = 0.53, 0.75) is significantly higher than RSI (0.633; 95% CI = 0.72, 0.90).ConclusionThe RSS has a higher consistency and better screening value for LPR compared to RSI. In addition, the RSS includes more reflux symptoms, which may reduce the number of missed diagnoses in patients with LPR to some extent.Level of Evidence3 Laryngoscope, 133:2104–2109, 2023

show abstract

Using RSI and RFS scores to differentiate between reflux-related and other causes of chronic laryngitis

Cited by 2 publications

References 27 publications

The Dubai Definition and Diagnostic Criteria of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux: The IFOS Consensus

The Dubai Definition and Diagnostic Criteria of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux: The IFOS Consensus

Comparison of Reflux Symptom Score versus Reflux Symptom Index in screening laryngopharyngeal reflux

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About