Comparing the diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal reflux between the reflux symptom index, clinical consultation and reflux finding score in a group of patients presenting to an ENT clinic with an interest in voice disorders: a pilot study in thirty-five patie

The Revised Reflux Symptom Index (R-RSI): Development, Internal and External Validation Study

INTRODUCTION

This study proposes a revised version of the Reflux Symptom Index (R-RSI), a seventeen-item questionnaire that was revised to increase the suspicion of laryngopharyngeal reflux disease (LPRD).

METHODS

Internal validation involved 213 participants, comprising 160 subjects without a previous LPRD diagnosis and 53 subjects with a self-reported previous diagnosis of LPRD with or without gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Test-retest reliability and internal consistency were calculated. For the external validation, 56 patients (independent from the previous cohort) were enrolled to explore the R-RSI screening properties and determine a cutoff using 24-h MII-pH as the gold standard.

RESULTS

R-RSI test-retest reliability was high, both for the total score (ICC: 0.970) and for each item (ranging from 0.876 to 0.980). Cronbach's alpha was 0.910, indicating excellent internal consistency of the questionnaire. Participants with a previous self-reported diagnosis scored significantly higher (mean 24.94 ± 7.4; median 26, IQR 20-29) than those without a previous diagnosis (mean 4.66 ± 5.3; median 4, IQR 1-6) (p value <0.0001). Participants with both previous LPRD and GERD diagnoses had higher scores (27.20 ± 7.8) compared to those with only LPRD (21.77 ± 5.5) (p value = 0.003). Using 24-h MII-pH diagnosis as a gold standard, the optimal R-RSI cutoff point was determined to be 18, with a sensitivity of 84.5% and a specificity of 81.8%, positive predictive value of 95%, and negative predictive value of 60%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that the R-RSI may be useful to suspect LPRD, with or without GERD. The R-RSI is a self-administered patient-reported outcome questionnaire that demonstrates excellent reliability and high screening properties. Employing a cutoff of ≥18 in the R-RSI can assist in diagnosing and monitoring LPRD.

Ear, nose and throat (ENT) manifestations and complications of reflux

Laryngopharyngeal reflux disease describes the backflow of acidic stomach content towards the larynx and is associated with symptoms such as cough, throat clearing and globus. It is a common presentation in primary care and the sequelae of symptoms that arise from the disease often present in ear, nose and throat clinics. Assessment and examination of patients presenting with reflux symptoms includes questionnaires, as well as direct visualisation of the pharynx and larynx, and takes a multidisciplinary team approach. Treatment options include lifestyle modification, medical therapy and in some specialist centres, surgical management to address the multitude of symptoms associated with the disease.

Assessment and Diagnostic Accuracy Evaluation of the Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) Scale: Psychometric Properties using Optimal Scaling Techniques

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the psychometric properties of the reflux symptom index (RSI) as short screening approach for the diagnostic of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) in patients with confirmed diagnosed regarding the 24-hour multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring (MII-pH).

METHODS

From January 2017 to December 2018, 56 patients with LPR symptoms and 71 healthy individuals (control group) were prospectively enrolled. The LPR diagnosis was confirmed through MII-pH results. All subjects (n = 127) fulfilled RSI and the Reflux Finding Score (RFS) was performed through flexible fiberoptic endoscopy. The sensitivity and the specificity of RSI was assessed by ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristic) analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 15 LPR patients (26.8%) of the clinical group met MII-pH diagnostic criteria. Among subjects classified as positive for MII- pH diagnoses, RSI and RFS mean scores were respectively 20 (SD ± 10.5) and 7.1 (SD ± 2.5), values not significantly different compared to the negative MII-pH group. The metric analysis of the items led to the realization of a binary recoding of the score. Both versions had similar psychometric properties, α was 0.840 for RSI original version and 0.836 for RSI binary version. High and comparable area under curve (AUC) values indicate a good ability of both scales to discriminate between individuals with and without LPR pathology diagnosis. Based on balanced sensitivity and specificity, the optimal cut-off scores for LPR pathology were ≥ 5 for RSI binary version and ≥ 15 for RSI original version. Both version overestimated LPR prevalence. The original version had more sensitivity and the RSI Binary version had more specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

It would be necessary to think about modifying the original RSI in order to improve its sensitivity and specificity (RSI binary version, adding or changing some items), or to introduce new scores in order to better frame the probably affected of LPR patient.

Validation of the Brazilian Portuguese Version of the Reflux Finding Score

INTRODUCTION

Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) poses a diagnostic challenge. Clinical diagnosis, based on suggestive symptoms and laryngoscopic signs of inflammation, should be acceptable, as long as diligent differential diagnosis is sought. In order to minimize subjectivity, a number of diagnostic instruments have been proposed, being the most common the Reflux Symptom Index and the Reflux Finding Score (RFS). The latter has been translated into several languages including Portuguese, but it still has not been properly validated in this language.

OBJECTIVE

To validate the Brazilian Portuguese version of the RFS.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

For validity and internal consistency, 172 adults were studied (106 with LPR and 66 healthy controls). Flexible transnasal laryngoscopy images were randomly examined twice by each of the two experienced otolaryngologists with a 72-hour interval. Strict exclusion criteria were applied to avoid other possible known causes of chronic laryngitis. For assessment of reproducibility and temporal stability, a random sample of 108 subjects (53 patients and 55 controls) were tested and retested.

RESULTS

A statistically significant difference was observed in the mean RFS between patients with LPR (10.26 ± 3.58) and controls (5.52 ± 1.34) (P < 0.001). The interclass correlation coefficient comparing test and retest for both raters was high (R1 = 0.956; R2 =  0.948).

CONCLUSION

The Brazilian Portuguese version of the RFS proved to be a reliable and reproducible instrument for the diagnosis of LPR with a sensitivity of 82.08%, a specificity of 93.94%, a positive predictive value of 95.60%, and a negative predictive value was 76.54%.

Sensitivity, Specificity, and Reproducibility of the Brazilian Portuguese Version of the Reflux Symptom Index

INTRODUCTION

The diagnosis of laryngopharyngeal reflux is controversial. There is currently no gold standard, so it relies mainly on suspicious clinical symptoms and videolaryngoscopic findings. Unfortunately these signs and symptoms are common to other causes of chronic laryngitis. Scoring systems have been proposed to reduce subjectivity in clinical diagnosis. The most widely used and accepted is the Reflux Symptom Index, which has already been translated into over 10 other languages.

OBJECTIVE

Study the psychometric properties of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Reflux Symptom Index (Índice de Sintomas de Refluxo - ISR).

METHODS

One hundred and fifty-four adults, 88 with laryngopharyngeal reflux and 66 healthy controls, were studied over a 6-month period, responding to the ISR after thoroughly investigated on possible other causes of chronic laryngitis and the presence of gastroesophageal disease. Test and retest reliability was addressed by reapplying the score to a random subgroup of 101 subjects.

RESULTS

The ISR of subjects was significantly higher than that of controls (Student t test for independent samples, P < 0.001). The ISR also showed high temporal stability and reproducibility (ICC of 0.988 with a confidence interval of 0.982-0.992). The ISR at a cutoff of 13 points presented a sensitivity of 78.4%, a specificity of 95.4%, a false negative of 4.55%, a false positive of 21.59%, a positive predictive value of 95.83%, and a negative predictive value of 86.93%.

CONCLUSION

The ISR proved to be a valid and reliable diagnostic tool.

Reflux characteristics in patients with gastroesophageal reflux-related chronic cough complicated by laryngopharyngeal reflux

Background

This study aimed to investigate the reflux characteristics in patients with gastroesophageal reflux-related chronic cough (GERC) complicated by laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR).

Methods

Patients with chronic cough were recruited. Reflux symptom index (RSI) scoring, cough symptom scoring, assessment of capsaicin cough sensitivity, and multichannel intraluminal impedance and pH monitoring (MII-pH) were performed.

Results

RSI score in GERC patients was significantly higher than that in patients with atopic cough (AC), cough variant asthma, eosinophilic bronchitis (EB), and upper airway cough syndrome (UACS) (P<0.05). The RSI score in non-acid GERC patients was significantly higher than that in acid GERC patients (P=0.003). The cut-off value of the RSI score was defined as 19 during diagnosis of non-acid GERC. In the RSI ≥19 group, there was more proximal reflux and more significant gas and non-acid reflux, and the efficacy of a combined use of baclofen or gabapentin was better than that of the RSI <19 group (P<0.05). The efficacy of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) at a routine dosage together with prokinetic agents in the RSI <19 group was better than that in the RSI ≥19 group (P=0.009).

Conclusions

LPR overlaps with GERC in part. GERC patients with higher RSI scores may present more proximal reflux, non-acid reflux, and gas reflux, and get better efficacy with neuromodulators (gabapentin or baclofen) used as an add-on therapy.

Evaluation of a laryngopharyngeal reflux management protocol

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness of a protocol for management of patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) in a multi-provider clinic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of 188 patients treated for LPR. A standardized clinical protocol for diagnosis and management was instituted in 2012. Two cohorts were established: those managed according to the protocol, and those who were not. For patients managed with the LPR protocol, diagnosis was made using clinical judgment, guided by the Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) and Reflux Finding Score (RFS). Patients were treated with proton pump inhibitors (PPI) with the goal of weaning therapy after symptom resolution. Response to therapy was rated using a global rating scale with three response levels: no response, partial response, and complete response. The primary outcome measure was complete response to therapy and the secondary outcome measures were any response (complete or partial) and successful wean off PPI therapy.

RESULTS

The patients treated with the LPR protocol had higher rates of complete response (p<0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in rates of any response (complete or partial) between the two groups (p=0.08). Patients treated using the LPR protocol were more likely to be successfully weaned off PPI therapy (p=0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of an LPR protocol improved treatment effectiveness in our clinic, highlighting the role of clinical protocols in reducing variability in care, thereby improving patient outcomes.

The Reliability of the Reflux Finding Score Among General Otolaryngologists

BACKGROUND

The reflux finding score (RFS) is a validated clinical severity scale for findings of laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) on fiberoptic laryngoscopy. To our knowledge, there have been no studies to determine whether severity of patient symptoms influence the RFS; in addition, the reliability of the RFS has not been tested for general otolaryngologists.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were (1) to determine whether the RFS for LPR is influenced by symptoms of reflux and (2) to determine the inter-rater reliability for general otolaryngologists in diagnosing LPR using the RFS.

METHODS

Ten general otolaryngologists were selected to participate. Participants were asked to complete an Internet survey consisting of flexible endoscopic videos of larynges with varying physical findings of reflux and grade the severity of reflux using the RFS. The videos were randomly shown with and without accompanying patient symptoms.

RESULTS

Our data suggest that patient symptoms influence the RFS. Inter-rater reliability for general otolaryngologists using the RFS is fair.

CONCLUSIONS

Among general otolaryngologists in our study, the reliability and objectivity of the RFS in diagnosing reflux cannot be demonstrated.