Lingual Tonsil Hypertrophy Grading and Its Relation to Sociodemographic Factors and Clinical Symptoms
1 other identifier
interventional
100
1 country
1
Brief Summary
The aim of this research was to evaluate the lingual tonsil hypertrophy (LTH) grading of patients with dysphagia using videolaryngoscopy and determine the relation of LTH grades to sociodemographic factors and clinical symptoms.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable
Started Oct 2014
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
October 1, 2014
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
May 1, 2016
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
May 1, 2016
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
August 27, 2016
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
October 6, 2016
CompletedOctober 6, 2016
October 1, 2016
1.6 years
August 27, 2016
October 4, 2016
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Lingual tonsil enlargement grade on videolaryngoscopy
Lingual tonsil enlargement grade was assessed using DelGaudio (2008) and Friedman (2015) grading systems during videolaryngoscopy. According DelGaudio severity of LTH was assessed as: grade 0- lingual tonsils are not enlarged; 1- the lingual tonsils are prominent but not in full contact with the epiglottis or obscuring the valleculae; 2- the lingual tonsils obscure the view of the valleculae and are fully in contact with the epiglottis; 3- the lingual tonsils fill the valleculae and partially or fully obscure the view of the epiglottis. Friedman grading system consists of 0 to 4 scale: 0- complete absence of lymphoid tissue; 1- lymphoid tissue scattered over tongue base; 2- lymphoid tissue covering entirety of tongue base with limited vertical thickness; 3- significantly raised lymphoid tissue covering entirety of the tongue base, approximately 5 to 10 mm in thickness; 4- lymphoid tissue rising above the tip of the epiglottis, 10 or more mm in thickness.
At baseline
Secondary Outcomes (14)
Sociodemographic factors: age
At baseline
Sociodemographic factors: gender
At baseline
Sociodemographic factors: body mass index (BMI)
At baseline
Sociodemographic factors: occupation and employment status
At baseline
Sociodemographic factors: health behaviors
At baseline
- +9 more secondary outcomes
Study Arms (2)
Lingual Tonsil Hypertrophy participants
EXPERIMENTALThe research group consisted of 50 consecutive adult outpatients suffering from swallowing disorders, examined by otorhinolaryngologist at the Hospital of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences. Lingual Tonsil Hypertrophy was diagnosed using videolaryngoscopy.
Control participants
OTHERThe control group consisted of 50 healthy adult participants, who were examined using videolaryngoscopy and no pharyngeal pathologies were diagnosed, including lingual tonsil hypertrophy.
Interventions
A rigid 70 degree laryngoscope is inserted into the subject's oropharynx, which allows to visualize the lingual tonsils. The size of the lingual tonsils is evaluated using DelGaudio and Friedman grading systems.
A validated clinical tool for suspecting laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). The questionnaire was proposed by Belafsky et al. (2002) and consists of 9 most common gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and LPR symptoms: hoarseness or a problem with your voice; clearing your throat; excess throat mucus or postnasal drip; difficulty swallowing food, liquids, or pills; coughing after you ate or after lying down; breathing difficulties or choking episodes; troublesome or annoying cough; sensation of something sticking in your throat or a lump in your throat; heartburn, chest pain, indigestion, or stomach acid coming up. Each symptom is evaluated on a scale from 0 to 5 (0 - no complaint, 5 - severe symptom). The sum of all symptom evaluations ranges from 0 to 45.
A validated questionnaire, proposed by Ohkuma et al. (2002). Lithuanian version of the questionnaire consists of 16 questions: choking during swallowing meals / liquids; difficulty eating solid foods; difficult swallowing; feeling of food getting stuck in the throat; longer than before eating time; feeling of food remaining in the mouth; feeling that food or liquid is going up into the throat from the stomach; feeling of food being stuck in the esophagus; weight loss; food getting stuck in the throat; food falling from the mouth; difficulty coughing during or after meals; occurrence of pneumonia; hoarseness; coughing during the night. Interpretation of dysphagia screening questionnaire: Advanced symptom - 2 points; Moderate intensity symptom - 1 point; No symptom - 0 point. At least one advanced symptom means - dysphagia. Higher score represents stronger dysphagia intensity. The maximum score is 32 points.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Adults
- Consent for participating in the research
- No cognitive disorders or mental illnesses
- Complaining about difficulty swallowing (research group)
- Enlarged lingual tonsils on videolaryngoscopy (research group)
- Generally healthy, no complaints of swallowing disorders (control group)
- Normal-sized lingual tonsils (control group)
You may not qualify if:
- Refusal to participate in the research
- Younger than 18 and older than 80 years old
- Serious mental or cognitive conditions
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
- Lithuanian University of Health Scienceslead
- Klaipėda Universitycollaborator
Study Sites (1)
Lithuanian University of Health Sciences
Kaunas, Lithuania
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Nora Siupsinskiene, Professor
Hospital of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Otorhinolaryngology department
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Nora Siupsinskiene, Professor
Klaipėda University
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- NON RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- SCREENING
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Professor medical doctor of otorhinolaryngology
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
August 27, 2016
First Posted
October 6, 2016
Study Start
October 1, 2014
Primary Completion
May 1, 2016
Study Completion
May 1, 2016
Last Updated
October 6, 2016
Record last verified: 2016-10