Optimizing interdisciplinary cooperation for patients with orofacial dysfunctions. Presentation of an interdisciplinary diagnostic referral sheet

Comparison between logopedic and MRI findings in evaluating tongue function

INTRODUCTION AND AIM

The logopedic examination according to Kittel (1998) is a method frequently used to diagnose tongue dysfunction. There has been a lack of reliable parameters to confirm this analysis. MR images visualize resting position and tongue movement as well as surrounding structures relevant to oral function. The aim of this study was to compare logopedic and MRI findings in evaluating tongue function and to assess whether MRI findings can replace logopedic examination for diagnostic purposes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

56 subjects were examined by the following methods: - Logopedic examination according to Kittel (1998) - MR images of the tongue resting position (T1-weighted) and deglutition process (2D-FIESTA technique) - MRI analysis according to Fujiki et al. (2000)

RESULTS

We observed marked differences between the logopedic and MRI findings, yet there were no significant correlations between the logopedic outcome and distances measured via MRI in tongue resting position and swallowing patterns.

CONCLUSION

We noted little concordance between logopedic findings according to Kittel and MRI analysis according to Fujiki et al. Which of these findings correctly reflects the actual clinical situation remains unclear.

Validity and reliability of logopedic assessments of tongue function

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated the validity and reliability of logopedic assessments of tongue function.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

At two practices for myofunctional therapy, diagnosis of tongue dysfunction according to Kittel (1984, 1996, 2008) was carried out in 52 subjects (aged 5 to 63 years) by three speech pathologists at each practice.

RESULTS

The agreement of the logopedic assessments was mostly satisfactory at one of the two practices but was unsatisfactory in most cases at the other practice.

CONCLUSION

The inconsistent agreement between the logopedic assessments does not permit a definitive statement about the actual clinical situation.