Special Diagnostic Studies in Sleep Apnea

Author(s):  
Mike Yao ◽  
Pamela Nguyen
2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 878-892
Author(s):  
Joseph A. Napoli ◽  
Linda D. Vallino

Purpose The 2 most commonly used operations to treat velopharyngeal inadequacy (VPI) are superiorly based pharyngeal flap and sphincter pharyngoplasty, both of which may result in hyponasal speech and airway obstruction. The purpose of this article is to (a) describe the bilateral buccal flap revision palatoplasty (BBFRP) as an alternative technique to manage VPI while minimizing these risks and (b) conduct a systematic review of the evidence of BBFRP on speech and other clinical outcomes. A report comparing the speech of a child with hypernasality before and after BBFRP is presented. Method A review of databases was conducted for studies of buccal flaps to treat VPI. Using the principles of a systematic review, the articles were read, and data were abstracted for study characteristics that were developed a priori. With respect to the case report, speech and instrumental data from a child with repaired cleft lip and palate and hypernasal speech were collected and analyzed before and after surgery. Results Eight articles were included in the analysis. The results were positive, and the evidence is in favor of BBFRP in improving velopharyngeal function, while minimizing the risk of hyponasal speech and obstructive sleep apnea. Before surgery, the child's speech was characterized by moderate hypernasality, and after surgery, it was judged to be within normal limits. Conclusion Based on clinical experience and results from the systematic review, there is sufficient evidence that the buccal flap is effective in improving resonance and minimizing obstructive sleep apnea. We recommend BBFRP as another approach in selected patients to manage VPI. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.9919352


2001 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 6-8
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham

Abstract The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fifth Edition, explains that independent medical evaluations (IMEs) are not the same as impairment evaluations, and the evaluation must be designed to provide the data to answer the questions asked by the requesting client. This article continues discussions from the September/October issue of The Guides Newsletter and examines what occurs after the examinee arrives in the physician's office. First are orientation and obtaining informed consent, and the examinee must understand that there is no patient–physician relationship and the physician will not provide treatment bur rather will send a report to the client who requested the IME. Many physicians ask the examinee to complete a questionnaire and a series of pain inventories before the interview. Typical elements of a complete history are shown in a table. An equally detailed physical examination follows a meticulous history, and standardized forms for reporting these findings are useful. Pain and functional status inventories may supplement the evaluation, and the examining physician examines radiographic and diagnostic studies. The physician informs the interviewee when the evaluation is complete and, without discussing the findings, asks the examinee to complete a satisfaction survey and reviews the latter to identify and rectify any issues before the examinee leaves. A future article will discuss high-quality IME reports.


1990 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 571-575
Author(s):  
Charles F. Koopmann, ◽  
Willard B. Moran

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document