Proposal for a screening questionnaire for detecting habitual mouth breathing, based on a mouth-breathing habit score

Snoring in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis after endoscopic sinus surgery

PURPOSES

In patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), we assessed quality of life (QOL) of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) patients with different self-reported snoring frequencies after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), and explored factors associated with pre-ESS snoring and post-ESS snoring reduction.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study was conducted in a tertiary referral center in Chengdu, China. Adult patients with medically recalcitrant CRS receiving initial ESS were engaged. Self-reported snoring was measured at baseline and 3-year follow-up, along with Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 and snoring visual analog scale assessment. Mouth breathing (MB), demographics, behavior, comorbidity factors, and objective CRS severity were considered.

RESULTS

In 210 patients who completed this study, 63 (30%) patients reported pre-ESS habitual snoring, and post-operative habitual snoring was observed in 52 (25%) patients. The presence of self-reported snoring was correlated with worse CRS QOL at baseline and 3-year follow-up. Obesity (odds ratio [OR] = 4.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.64-11.28; p < 0.01) and posterior-to-anterior ethmoid sinus ratio greater than one (PE/AE, OR = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.10-0.99; p = 0.05) were associated with pre-ESS snoring in univariable and multivariable analysis. The post-operative reduction of snoring frequency was related with patient age over 65 (OR = 11.55; 95%CI, 1.35-98.79; p = 0.03) and bilateral opacification in the Lund-Mackay system (OR = 8.04; 95%CI, 1.24-51.90; p = 0.03) in multivariable analysis. Pre-operative snoring and MB were associated with increased risk of post-operative snoring (p < 0.01 for each comparison).

CONCLUSIONS

Post-ESS, self-reported snoring was associated with worse CRS QOL. Obesity and PE/AE > 1 were risk factors of pre-operative snoring. Advanced age and bilateral opacification were associated with greater improvement of snoring after ESS.

Towards a better diagnosis of mouth breathing: validity and reliability of a protocol for assessing the awake breathing pattern in preschool children

PURPOSE

The Awake Breathing Pattern Assessment (ABPA) is a prototypical clinical grid recently designed through an international consensus of Speech and Language Pathologists (SLPs) to categorize the awake and habitual breathing pattern during the orofacial myofunctional assessment. This cross-sectional study aims to explore the psychometric properties of the ABPA in a preschool population.

METHODS

133 children from 2;11 to 6 years old were assessed with the ABPA. The percentage of time spent breathing through the mouth was objectively measured by a CO2 sensor and used as a baseline measurement. We first performed a multivariate Latent Profile Analysis based on the CO2 measurement and a parental questionnaire to define the number of categories that best characterize the breathing pattern. Subsequently, we assessed the intra- and inter-rater reliability, internal consistency criterion validity, construct validity and sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS

The awake breathing pattern can best be described by two groups: nasal and mouth breathing. The ABPA, initially designed in three groups, was adjusted accordingly. This final version showed excellent intra-rater and inter-rater reliability. There was a significant correlation between the ABPA and the CO2 measurement. The ABPA showed a fair sensitivity and a good specificity.

CONCLUSION

The reference tool based on CO2 data was used in children for the first time and was found to be reliable. The ABPA is a suitable tool for SLPs to confirm the diagnosis of mouth breathing in preschool children if more sensitive screening tools, like parental questionnaires, are used beforehand.

Mouth Breathing and Its Impact on Atypical Swallowing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The aim of this systematic review is the assessment of the effect of mouth breathing on the prevalence of tongue thrust. The review was performed according to the PRISMA 2020 checklist guidelines, and the protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022339527). The inclusion criteria were the following: studies of clinical trials and cross-sectional and longitudinal descriptive studies that evaluate the appearance of tongue thrust in patients with mouth breathing; healthy subjects of any age, race or sex; and studies with a minimum sample group of five cases. The exclusion criteria were the following: studies with syndromic patients, articles from case reports, and letters to the editor and/or publisher. Searches were performed in electronic databases such as The National Library of Medicine (MEDLINE via PUBMED), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science and Scopus, including studies published until November 2023, without a language filter. The methodological quality of the included case-control studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tool was used for descriptive cross-sectional studies and cross-sectional prevalence studies. A meta-analysis was conducted on studies that provided data on patients' classification according to mouth breathing (yes/no) as well as atypical swallowing (yes/no) using Review Manager 5.4. From 424 records, 12 articles were selected, and 4 were eligible for meta-analysis. It was shown that there is no consensus on the diagnostic methods used for mouth breathing and tongue thrust. The pooled risk ratio of atypical swallowing was significantly higher in the patients with mouth breathing (RR: 3.70; 95% CI: 2.06 to 6.66). These studies have several limitations, such as the heterogeneity among the individual studies in relation to the diagnostic tools and criteria for the assessment of mouth breathing and atypical swallowing. Considering the results, this systematic review shows that patients with mouth breathing presented higher risk ratios for atypical swallowing.

Assessment of mouth breathing by Speech-Language Pathologists: an international Delphi consensus

PURPOSE

mouth breathing (MB) has detrimental effects on children's growth. Diagnosis of MB is possible through a multidisciplinary approach including Speech-Language Pathologist's (SLP) assessment; however, SLPs currently have little to no defined selection criteria to determine the awake and habitual breathing pattern. This study aims at identifying relevant criteria for the assessment of the habitual and awake breathing pattern of preschool children, and developing a grid that would help SLPs diagnose MB in their clinical practice.

METHODS

A three-rounded online international Delphi process was conducted to achieve a consensus on the relevant items and their interpretation. Agreement was established through a Content Validity Ratio calculation. Based on the agreed items, we developed a grid through a scoring function.

RESULTS

Observing the child at rest (i.e., time spent with an open/closed mouth and position of the tongue/lips) was considered the most important criterion. The experts also considered that observing the breathing pattern while chewing (open/closed mouth) and after swallowing (i.e., air intake and open/ closed mouth just after swallowing) should provide relevant but secondary information in decision-making. We were able to establish a clinical grid based on those criteria.

CONCLUSION

The Delphi procedure provided content-valid criteria and conditions of observation for the myofunctional SLP assessment of the awake and habitual breathing pattern in preschoolers. A clinical validation of the developed prototype grid should be conducted in preschool children to explore its effectiveness in the diagnosis of MB.

Association Between Mouth Breathing and Asthma: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the association between asthma and mouth breathing. We performed a systematic search in the PubMed, SCOPUS, Lilacs, Web of Science, Google Scholar and OpenThesis databases.

RECENT FINDINGS

Asthma is defined as a heterogeneous disease characterized by variable symptoms of wheezing, shortness of breath, chest oppression and/or cough, and limitation of expiratory airflow. Although several studies have examined the association between asthma and mouth breathing, there are no systematic reviews or meta-analyses that synthesize the available bodies of evidence. We used the odds ratio as a measure of the association between asthma and mouth breathing. Summary estimates were calculated using random-effects models, and the risk of bias was estimated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for case-control studies and the National Institutes of Health tool for cross-sectional studies. Nine studies were included in the present systematic review. Data from 12,147 subjects were analyzed, of which 2083 were children and adolescents and 10,064 were adults. We found an association between mouth breathing and asthma in children and adolescents (OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.78-3.39) and in adults (OR 4.60, 95% CI 1.49-14.20). However, limitations were found in the methodological description of the included studies, as well as high heterogeneity among studies evaluating adult populations. This meta-analysis showed an association between mouth breathing and asthma in children, adolescents and adults, but the results should be interpreted with caution. Further studies with standardized criteria for the investigation of mouth breathing are needed.