Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Evaluates nasal airway resistance in normal subjects, indicating measurement reliability differences.
In this study active anterior (AAR) and active posterior (APR) rhinomanometry were performed by 100 normal subjects with a Mercury rhinomanometer according to the recommendations of the International Standardization Committee. There was no significant difference between total nasal airway resistance (Rna) values obtained with APR by direct measurement and those calculated from AAR. Mean total Rna was 0.31 Pa/cm3/s (range 0.13-0.84) at a reference pressure of 75 Pa. Measurements by AAR were more reproducible than those by APR, mean intrasubject coefficients of variation were 12 and 16% respectively. This reproducibility was similar to that of lower airways' resistance measurements. Rna values from this population did not conform to a normal Gaussian distribution. Rna was higher during expiration than inspiration and values were higher in women than in men.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shelton et al. (1992) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: