On standardised documentation of facial palsy

22Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

To establish an acceptable and reliable standard for evaluation of facial palsy, the facial movement as well resting condition was recorded on a videotape and an analytical study was performed. Eight patients with intratemporal facial palsy of varying degrees served as subjects. The degree of facial palsy was assessed by twelve qualified otologic surgeons and estimated of on ten facial functional units, which were expressed as scores of five and three ratings The sum of the given rating scores of ten discrete funtional units was designated as a paralysis score. There was no statistically significant difference in the mean paralysis score between the two rating scales, however, assessment of the judges showed better consistency in three rating method than in five. Based on experimental evidence and clinical experience, this method of estimating the grade of facial paralysis using three rating scales proved clinically feasible and valuable. © 1977, The Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Society of Japan, Inc. All rights reserved.

References Powered by Scopus

The result of intratemporal treatment of facial palsy

62Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Electrodiagnosis in Facial Palsy

47Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Electrodiagnosis in Facial Palsy

30Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Free vascularized nerve grafting for immediate facial nerve reconstruction

54Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

An Evidence-Based Approach to Facial Reanimation

45Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A General Approach to Facial Palsy

35Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Yanagihara, N. (1977). On standardised documentation of facial palsy. Journal of Otolaryngology of Japan, 80(8), 799–805. https://doi.org/10.3950/jibiinkoka.80.799

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 3

60%

Researcher 2

40%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 5

83%

Engineering 1

17%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free