Abstract
Background: Most used subjective Unilateral Peripheral Facial Palsy (UPFP) grading systems are characterized by high variability and low reproducibility and doesn’t allow a separate evaluation of single facial regions.
Objective: To assess the reliability of a new objective method for classification of UPFP, comparing it with House-Brackmann (HB) and Sunnybrook facial grading (SFGS) systems.
Method: Forty-seven patients affected by UPFP of different HB grade were included. Each patient underwent a blinded examination by three different operators, via the two subjective methods (HBGS and SFGS) and a newly proposed objective one, that was obtained from a digital video-analysis, named SMART FACIAL system. Results were converted by validated conversion scales into HBGS grades and statistically compared.
Results: In 87,23% (n° 41 pts) consistency was found between the grades obtained with all the three evaluation methods; in 10,41% (n°5 pts), between HBGS and SFGS grade and in 2,08% (n°1 pt) between HBGS grades and SMART-FACIAL system. Statistical analysis showed significant correlation among the three systems (p < .000).
Conclusions: The SMART FACIAL system presents high reliability also in comparison with the most frequently used subjective methods.
Significance: This method represents a fast, simple and thorough way to analyze UPFP, especially during physical rehabilitation.
Chinese abstract
背景:最常用的主观单侧周围性面神经麻痹(UPFP)分级系统的特点是高度可变性和低度重现性, 并且不能对单个面部区域分别进行评估。
目的:评估一种新的UPFP分类的客观方法的可靠性, 并与House-Brackmann(HB)和Sunnybrook面部分级(SFGS)系统进行比较。
方法:纳入47例不同HB级的UPFP患者。每位患者由三位操作者用两种主观方法(HBGS和SFGS)和一种新提出的客观方法进行盲法检查。新方法是通过数字视频分析(名为SMART FACIAL系统)而获得的。用认可的转换量表将检查结果转换为HBGS等级, 并对其进行统计学比较。
结果:在所有三种评估方法获得的等级之间发现87,23%(n°41 pts)的一致性;在HBGS和SFGS等级之间, 一致性为10,41%(n°5pts);在HBGS等级和SMART-FACIAL系统之间, 一致性为2,08%(n°1pt)。统计分析显示, 三个系统之间存在显著相关性(p <.000)。
结论:与最常用的主观方法相比, SMART FACIAL系统同样具有高度可靠性。
意义:这种方法是一种快速、简单、全面的分析UPFP的方法, 用于身体康复期间, 尤其如此。
Disclosure statement
No potential conlict of interest was reported by the authors.