Association of Dry Eye with Laryngopharyngeal Reflux in Clinical Practice

Figures & data

Table 1. Contingency tables and analysis output of the association between clinical conditions and RSI (N = 245). Characteristic: variable taken into account; OR (95% CI): Odd Ratio coefficient with 95% confidence interval

	Descriptive statistics		Univariate analysis
Characteristic	Normal RSI (≤13; n = 165)	Pathological RSI (>13; n = 80)	OR (95%CI)	p-value
Subjects				<0.0001
Comparison Group	81 (49.09%)	12 (15%)	1
DED Patients	84 (50.91%)	68 (85%)	8 (3.84: 18.09)

Table 2. Descriptive statistics and multivariate analysis in all patients. Outcome = outcome taken into account; Descriptive statistics are reported as mean with standard deviation. Estimate (95%CI) = regression coefficient with 95% Confidence Interval (marked with *) and odd ratios, estimated using logistic (marked with ◊) were reported; p-value = the Likelihood Ratio p-value. In bold, the p-values below 0.05

Outcome	Normal RSI (≤13; n = 165)	Pathological RSI (>13; n = 80)	Estimate (95%CI)	p-value
SANDE Frequency	40.6 (34.47)	63.07 (28.51)	13 (3.54: 22.45) *	0.02
SANDE Severity	40.65 (33.71)	59.44 (29.09)	10.55 (2.6: 18.5) *	0.01
OSDI	29.12 (24.48)	48.33 (24.09)	9.44 (4.36: 14.52) *	<0.001
Schirmer	9.89 (7.31)	13.09 (10.25)	2.93 (−0.44: 6.3) *	0.08
BUT	7.1 (4.9)	5.08 (3.98)	−0.03 (−1.09: 1.04) *	0.96
Oxford-RE	0.66^Citation1	1.3 (1.17)	1.24 (0.87: 1.78) ◊	0.22
Oxford-LE	0.71 (1.11)	1.25 (1.15)	1.25 (0.87: 1.79) ◊	0.23

Table 3. The RSI descriptive statistics and the MRM output of outcomes in Comparison Group patients. Descriptive statistics are reported as mean with standard deviation. Estimate (95%CI) = regression coefficient with 95% Confidence Interval (marked with *) and odd ratios, estimated using logistic (marked with ◊) regression, were reported; p-value: Likelihood Ratio p-value for the interaction terms. In bold, the p-values below 0.05

	Comparison Group subjects
	Descriptive statistics		Univariate analysis
Outcome	Normal RSI (≤13; n = 81)	Pathological RSI (>13; n = 12)	Estimate (95%CI)	p-value
SANDE Frequency	13.83 (15.77)	31.4^Citation22	16.36 (2.68: 30.04) *	0.02
SANDE Severity	21.38 (23.42)	41.66 (32.24)	14.51 (0.82: 28.2) *	0.03
OSDI	10.68 (7.79)	23.63 (26.09)	12.54 (5.43: 19.66) *	<0.001
Schirmer	15.38 (4.33)	22.6 (7.83)	7.22 (1.62: 12.81) *	0.01
BUT	10.86 (3.17)	10.5 (4.07)	0.98 (−1.53: 3.49) *	0.5069
Oxford_RE	0.12 (0.33)	0.2 (0.45)	1.73 (0.2: 15.2) ◊	0.6434
Oxford_LE	0.16 (0.37)	0.2 (0.45)	1.38 (0.16: 12) ◊	0.7774

Table 4. The RSI descriptive statistics and the MRM output of outcomes in DED patients. Descriptive statistics are reported as mean with standard deviation. Estimate (95%CI) = regression coefficient with 95% Confidence Interval (marked with *) and odd ratios, estimated using logistic (marked with ◊) regression, were reported; p-value: Likelihood Ratio p-value for the interaction terms. In bold, the p-values below 0.05

	DED patients
	Descriptive statistics		Univariate analysis
Outcome	Normal RSI (≤13; n = 84)	Pathological RSI (>13; n = 68)	Estimate (95%CI)	p-value
SANDE Frequency	60.46 (30.97)	66.31 (27.24)	9.72 (−1.97: 21.42) *	0.15
SANDE Severity	59.22 (31.71)	62.68 (27.53)	6.65 (−3.42: 16.73) *	0.33
OSDI	46.9 (21.78)	52.69 (21.08)	8.75 (1.9: 15.6) *	0.01
Schirmer	6.92 (6.9)	10.44 (9.35)	0.47 (−3.62: 4.57) *	0.77
BUT	4.19 (3.13)	4.29 (3.33)	0.21 (−0.94: 1.37) *	0.73
Oxford_RE	1.16 (1.14)	1.39 (1.17)	1.22 (0.85: 1.75) ◊	0.26
Oxford_LE	1.21 (1.3)	1.34 (1.15)	1.21 (0.83: 1.75) ◊	0.32

Clayton JA. Dry eye. New England J Med. 2018;378:2212–23. doi:https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1407936.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Schaumberg DA, Gulati A, Mathers WD, Clinch T, Lemp MA, Nelson JD, Foulks GN, Dana R. Development and validation of a short global dry eye symptom index. Ocul Surf. 2007;5:50–57. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S1542-0124(12)70053-8.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar