Accuracy of Pressure-Flow Estimates of Velopharyngeal Orifice Size in an Analog Model and Human Subjects This study examined the accuracy of pressure-flow estimates of velopharyngeal (V-P) orifice size as applied to an analog model and two human subjects. Accuracy was assessed under differing conditions of degree of nasal resistance and type of instrumental interface. Known V-P orifice openings were introduced in the model through use ... Research Article
Research Article  |   December 01, 1988
Accuracy of Pressure-Flow Estimates of Velopharyngeal Orifice Size in an Analog Model and Human Subjects
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Thomas W. Guyette
    Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Center, Chicago, IL
  • Mary A. Carpenter
    University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS
Article Information
Research Articles
Research Article   |   December 01, 1988
Accuracy of Pressure-Flow Estimates of Velopharyngeal Orifice Size in an Analog Model and Human Subjects
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, December 1988, Vol. 31, 537-548. doi:10.1044/jshr.3104.537
History: Received January 8, 1987 , Accepted January 11, 1988
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, December 1988, Vol. 31, 537-548. doi:10.1044/jshr.3104.537
History: Received January 8, 1987; Accepted January 11, 1988

This study examined the accuracy of pressure-flow estimates of velopharyngeal (V-P) orifice size as applied to an analog model and two human subjects. Accuracy was assessed under differing conditions of degree of nasal resistance and type of instrumental interface. Known V-P orifice openings were introduced in the model through use of cover plates and in the humans through use of modified nasopharyngeal obturators. Nasal resistances were altered with perforated nasal plugs. Instrumental interfaces differed principally in the method used to detect nasal cavity pressure. Measures were applied to the hydrokinetic equation to estimate V-P area values. Data from the analog model and the human subjects were comparable in many respects. In low nasal resistance, area estimates were reasonably accurate regardless of the interface utilized. In high nasal resistance error typically increased, although not equally across interface types. Potential sources of error are identified and discussed.

Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access