Validierung einer Deutschen Version des Sunnybrook Facial Grading Systems

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund: Obwohl das Sunnybrook Facial Grading System (SFGS) weltweit häufig zur Beurteilung der Funktionsstörung einer Fazialisparese verwendet wird, gibt es bislang keine validierte deutsche Version des Bewertungsbogens.

Methoden: Die englischsprachige Version des SFGS wurde entsprechend internationaler Richtlinien übersetzt und validiert. Die Interrater-Reliabilität von 5 Bewertern (Logopädie-Studenten) und Intrarater-Reliabilität bei Wiederholung derselben Bewertung zu 2 Zeitpunkten wurde anhand des Grading von Videoaufnahmen von 18 Patienten mit unterschiedlichen Fazialisparesen mit dem Intra-Klassen-Korrelation Koeffizient (ICC) und anderen Reliabilitäts-Maßen untersucht.

Ergebnisse: Für die Interrater-Reliabilität lag der ICC für die 4 Komponenten des SFGS, Symmetrie in Ruhe, Symmetrie in Bewegung, Synkinesien und Summenwert für die erste Messung bei ICC=0,845; 0,903; 0,731 und 0,918; und für die zweite Messung bei 0,881; 0,932; 0,818 und 0,940. Die Intrarater-Reliabilität lag im Mittel für die 4 Komponenten bei ICC=0,791; 0,906; 0,770 und 0,905.

Diskussion: Es gibt nun selbst für ungeübte Bewerter eine valide deutsche Version des SFGS; diese sollte zur Bewertung von Fazialisparesen im klinischen Alltag und in Studien verwendet werden, um Daten von deutschen Patienten mit denen der internationalen Literatur besser vergleichen zu können.

Abstract

Background: The Sunnybrook facial grading system (SFGS) is frequently applied to evaluate facial function in patients with facial palsy, but still now there is no validated German version of this evaluation sheet.

Methods: The original English version of the SFGS was translated and validated in accordance with international standards. The interrater reliability from 5 raters (speech therapy students) and the intrarater reliability from repeated ratings at 2 time points using video tapes of 18 patients with different types of facial palsy were analyzed by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and other reliability measures.

Results: ICC for the interrater reliability for the 4 components of the SFGS, resting symmetry, symmetry during voluntary movements, synkinesis, and the composite score were ICC 0.845; 0.903; 0.731 and 0.918, respectively, for the first evaluation and ICC 0.881; 0.932; 0.818 and 0.940, respectively, for the second evaluation. The mean intrarater reliability for the 4 SFGS scores was ICC=0.791; 0.906; 0.770 and 0.905.

Discussion: There is now a valid German version of the SFGS available that can be used even by novices. The German version is suitable for evaluation of facial palsies in clinical routine and studies to allow a better comparability of German patients with results of the international literature.

• Literatur

• 1 Heckmann JG, Lang C, Glocker FX, Urban P, Bischoff C, Weder B, Reiter G, Meier U, Guntinas-Lichius O. The new S2k AWMF guideline for the treatment of Bell’s palsy in commented short form. Laryngorhinootol 2012; 91: 686-692
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 House JW, Brackmann DE. Facial nerve grading system. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1985; 93: 146-147
  Google Scholar
• 3 Stennert E, Limberg CH, Frentrup KP. An index for paresis and defective healing – an easily applied method for objectively determining therapeutic results in facial paresis (author’s transl). HNO 1977; 25: 238-245
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Ross BG, Fradet G, Nedzelski JM. Development of a sensitive clinical facial grading system. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1996; 114: 380-386
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Fattah AY, Gavilan J, Hadlock TA, Marcus JR, Marres H, Nduka C, Slattery WH, Snyder-Warwick AK. Survey of methods of facial palsy documentation in use by members of the Sir Charles Bell Society. Laryngoscope 2014; 124: 2247-2251
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Fattah AY, Gurusinghe AD, Gavilan J, Hadlock TA, Marcus JR, Marres H, Nduka CC, Slattery WH, Snyder-Warwick AK. Sir Charles Bell Society . Facial nerve grading instruments: systematic review of the literature and suggestion for uniformity. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015; 35: 569-5679
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Pavese C, Tinelli C, Furini F, Abbamonte M, Giromini E, Sala V, De Silvestri A, Cecini M, Dalla Toffola E. Validation of the Italian version of the Sunnybrook Facial Grading System. Neurol Sci 2013; 34: 457-463
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Pavese C, Cecini M, Lozza A, Biglioli F, Lisi C, Bejor M, Dalla Toffola E. Rehabilitation and functional recovery after masseteric-facial nerve anastomosis: a case series. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2016; 52: 379-388
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 1993; 46: 1417-1432
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Vrabec JT, Backous DD, Djalilian HR, Gidley PW, Leonetti JP, Marzo SJ, Marcus D, Ng M, Ramsey MJ, Schaitkin BM, Smouha E, Toh EH, Wax MK, Williamson RA, Smith EO. Facial Nerve Disorders Committee. Facial nerve grading system 2.0. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009; 140: 445-450
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Rickenmann J, Jaquenod C, Cerenko D, Fisch U. Comparative value of facial nerve grading systems. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997; 117: 322-325
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Alicandri-Ciufelli M, Piccinini A, Grammatica A, Salafia F, Ciancimino C, Cunsolo E, Pingani L, Rigatelli M, Genovese E, Monzani D, Gioacchini FM, Marchioni D, Presutti L. A step backward: the ‚Rough‘ facial nerve grading system. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2013; 41: e175-e179
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Neely JG, Cherian NG, Dickerson CB, Nedzelski JM. Sunnybrook facial grading system: reliability and criteria for grading. Laryngoscope 2010; 120: 1038-1045
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Kayhan FT, Zurakowski D, Rauch SD. Toronto Facial Grading System: interobserver reliability. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000; 122: 212-215
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Coulson SE, Croxson GR, Adams RD, O‘Dwyer NJ. Reliability of the „Sydney,“ „Sunnybrook,“ and „House Brackmann“ facial grading systems to assess voluntary movement and synkinesis after facial nerve paralysis. O Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2005; 132: 543-549
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Kanerva M, Poussa T, Pitkaranta A. Sunnybrook and House-Brackmann Facial Grading Systems: intrarater repeatability and interrater agreement. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006; 135: 865-871
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Hayes AF, Krippendorff K. Answering the Call for a Standard Reliability Measure for Coding Data. Comm Meth Measures 2007; 1: 77-89
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Krippendorff K. Reliability in content analysis: some common misconceptions and recommendations. Human Comm Res 2004; 30: 411-433
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Linstrom CJ. Objective facial motion analysis in patients with facial nerve dysfunction. Laryngoscope 2002; 112: 1129-1147
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Hadlock TA, Urban LS. Toward a universal, automated facial measurement tool in facial reanimation. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2012; 14: 277-282
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Lee LN, Susarla SM, Henstrom DK, Hohman MH, Durand ML, Cheney ML, Hadlock TA. A comparison of facial nerve grading systems. Ann Plast Surg 2013; 70: 313-316
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Haase D, Minnigerode L, Volk GF, Denzler J, Guntinas-Lichiu O. Automated and objective action coding of facial expressions in patients with acute facial palsy. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2015; 272: 1259-1267
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Volk GF, Steigerwald F, Vitek P, Finkensieper M, Kreysa H, Guntinas-Lichiu O. Facial disability index and facial clinimetric evaluation scale: validation of the German versions. Laryngorhinootol 2015; 94: 163-168
  PubMedGoogle Scholar

• Supplementary Material