Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Acta Neurochirurgica 4/2017

01-04-2017 | Original Article - Brain Tumors

Interobserver variability of the House-Brackmann facial nerve grading system for the analysis of a randomized multi-center phase III trial

Authors: Christian Scheller, Andreas Wienke, Marcos Tatagiba, Alireza Gharabaghi, Kristofer F. Ramina, Konstanze Scheller, Julian Prell, Johannes Zenk, Oliver Ganslandt, Barbara Bischoff, Cordula Matthies, Thomas Westermaier, Gregor Antoniadis, Maria Teresa Pedro, Veit Rohde, Kajetan von Eckardstein, Thomas Kretschmer, Malte Kornhuber, Fred G. Barker II, Christian Strauss

Published in: Acta Neurochirurgica | Issue 4/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Evidence of a high interobserver variability of the subjective House-Brackmann facial nerve grading system (HBGS) would justify cost- and time-consuming technological enhancements of objective classifications for facial nerve paresis.

Method

A total of 112 patients were recruited for a randomized multi-center trial to investigate the efficacy of prophylactic nimodipine treatment in vestibular schwannoma (VS) surgery. For the present investigation both treatment groups were pooled for the assessment of facial nerve function preoperatively, in the early postoperative course and 1 year after the surgery. Facial nerve function was documented photographically at rest and in motion and classified according to the HBGS by three independent observers (neurosurgeon, neurologist, ENT) and by the investigator of each center.

Results

Interobserver variability was considerably different with respect to the three time points depending upon the severity of facial nerve paresis. Preoperative facial nerve function was normal or only mildly impaired (HB grade I or II) and was assessed consistently in 97%. Facial nerve function deteriorated during the early postoperative course and was subsequently documented without dissent in only 36%, with one grade difference in 45%, two grade difference in 17% and three grade difference in 2%. One year after surgery, facial nerve function predominantly improved resulting in a consistent assessment in 66%. Differing ratings were observed in 34% with one grade deviation in 88% and of two grades in 12%. Patients with differing ratings of two or more grades exhibited considerably worse facial nerve function (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The HBGS produced comparable results between different observers in patients with normal or only mildly impaired facial nerve function. Interobserver variability increased depending on the severity of facial nerve paresis. The results suggest that the HBGS does not promote uniformity of reporting and comparison of outcomes in patients with moderate or severe facial nerve paresis.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Ahrens A, Skarada D, Wallace M, Heung JY, Neely JG (1999) Rapid simultaneous comparison system for subjective grading scales for facial paralysis. Am J Otol 20:667–671PubMed Ahrens A, Skarada D, Wallace M, Heung JY, Neely JG (1999) Rapid simultaneous comparison system for subjective grading scales for facial paralysis. Am J Otol 20:667–671PubMed
2.
go back to reference Alicandri-Ciufelli M, Piccinini A, Grammatica A et al (2013) A step backward: the “Rough” facial nerve grading system. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 41:175–179CrossRef Alicandri-Ciufelli M, Piccinini A, Grammatica A et al (2013) A step backward: the “Rough” facial nerve grading system. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 41:175–179CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Burres SA, Fisch U (1986) The comparison of facial nerve grading systems. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 112:755–758CrossRefPubMed Burres SA, Fisch U (1986) The comparison of facial nerve grading systems. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 112:755–758CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Coulson SE, Croxon GR (1995) Assessing physiotherapy rehabilitation outcomes following facial nerve paresis. Aust J Otolaryngol 2:20–24 Coulson SE, Croxon GR (1995) Assessing physiotherapy rehabilitation outcomes following facial nerve paresis. Aust J Otolaryngol 2:20–24
5.
go back to reference Coulson SE, Croxon GR, Adams RD, O’Dwyer NJ (2005) Reliability of the “Sydney”, “Sunnybrook”, and “House Brackmann” facial grading systems to assess voluntary movement and synkenesis after facial nerve paralysis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 132:543–549CrossRefPubMed Coulson SE, Croxon GR, Adams RD, O’Dwyer NJ (2005) Reliability of the “Sydney”, “Sunnybrook”, and “House Brackmann” facial grading systems to assess voluntary movement and synkenesis after facial nerve paralysis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 132:543–549CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Croxon G, May M, Mester SJ (1990) Grading facial nerve function: House-Brackmann versus Burres-Fisch methods. Am J Otol 11:240–246 Croxon G, May M, Mester SJ (1990) Grading facial nerve function: House-Brackmann versus Burres-Fisch methods. Am J Otol 11:240–246
7.
go back to reference de Ru JA, Braunius WW, van Benthem PP, Busschers WB, Hordijk GJ (2006) Grading facial nerve function: why a new grading system, the MoReSS, should be proposed. Otol Neurotol 27:1030–1036CrossRefPubMed de Ru JA, Braunius WW, van Benthem PP, Busschers WB, Hordijk GJ (2006) Grading facial nerve function: why a new grading system, the MoReSS, should be proposed. Otol Neurotol 27:1030–1036CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Fattah AY, Gurusinghe AD, Gavilan J et al (2015) Facial nerve grading instruments: systematic review of the literature and suggestion for uniformity. Plast Reconstr Surg 135:569–579CrossRefPubMed Fattah AY, Gurusinghe AD, Gavilan J et al (2015) Facial nerve grading instruments: systematic review of the literature and suggestion for uniformity. Plast Reconstr Surg 135:569–579CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Gordon AS, Westrick AC, Falola MI et al (2012) Reliability of postoperative photographs in assessment of facial nerve function after vestibular schwannoma resection. J Neurosurg 117:860–863CrossRefPubMed Gordon AS, Westrick AC, Falola MI et al (2012) Reliability of postoperative photographs in assessment of facial nerve function after vestibular schwannoma resection. J Neurosurg 117:860–863CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Henstrom DK, Skilbeck CJ, Weinberg J, Knox C, Cheney ML, Hadlock TA (2011) Good correlation between original and modified House Brackmann facial grading systems. Laryngoscope 121:47–50CrossRefPubMed Henstrom DK, Skilbeck CJ, Weinberg J, Knox C, Cheney ML, Hadlock TA (2011) Good correlation between original and modified House Brackmann facial grading systems. Laryngoscope 121:47–50CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference House JW, Brackmann DE (1985) Facial nerve grading system. Otolarangol Head Neck Surg 93:146–147CrossRef House JW, Brackmann DE (1985) Facial nerve grading system. Otolarangol Head Neck Surg 93:146–147CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Kanerva M, Poussa T, Pitkäranta A (2006) Sunnybrook and House-Brackmann facial grading systems: intrarater repeatability and interrater agreement. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 135:865–871CrossRefPubMed Kanerva M, Poussa T, Pitkäranta A (2006) Sunnybrook and House-Brackmann facial grading systems: intrarater repeatability and interrater agreement. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 135:865–871CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Kang TS, Vrabec FT, Giddings N, Terris DJ (2002) Facial nerve grading systems (1985–2002): beyond the House-Brackmann scale. Otol Neurotol 23:767–771CrossRefPubMed Kang TS, Vrabec FT, Giddings N, Terris DJ (2002) Facial nerve grading systems (1985–2002): beyond the House-Brackmann scale. Otol Neurotol 23:767–771CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Kanzaki J, Tos M, Sanna M, Moffat DA (2003) New and modified reporting systems from the consensus meeting on systems for reporting results in vestibular schwannoma. Otol Neurotol 24:642–649CrossRefPubMed Kanzaki J, Tos M, Sanna M, Moffat DA (2003) New and modified reporting systems from the consensus meeting on systems for reporting results in vestibular schwannoma. Otol Neurotol 24:642–649CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Kecskes G, Jori J, O’Reilly BF, Viharos L, Rovo L (2011) Clinical assessment of a new computerized objective method of measuring facial palsy. Clin Otolaryngol 36:313–319CrossRefPubMed Kecskes G, Jori J, O’Reilly BF, Viharos L, Rovo L (2011) Clinical assessment of a new computerized objective method of measuring facial palsy. Clin Otolaryngol 36:313–319CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174CrossRefPubMed Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Lee NL, Susarla SM, Hohman MH et al (2013) A comparison of facial nerve grading systems. Ann Plast Surg 70:313–316PubMed Lee NL, Susarla SM, Hohman MH et al (2013) A comparison of facial nerve grading systems. Ann Plast Surg 70:313–316PubMed
19.
go back to reference Meier-Gallati V, Scriba H, Fisch U (1988) Objective evaluation scaling of facial nerve function based on area analysis (OSCAR). Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 118:545–550 Meier-Gallati V, Scriba H, Fisch U (1988) Objective evaluation scaling of facial nerve function based on area analysis (OSCAR). Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 118:545–550
20.
go back to reference Murty GE, Diver JP, Kelly PJ, O’Donoghue GM, Bradley PJ (1994) The Nottingham system: objective assessment of facial nerve function in the clinic. Otolarangol Head Neck Surg 110:156–161CrossRef Murty GE, Diver JP, Kelly PJ, O’Donoghue GM, Bradley PJ (1994) The Nottingham system: objective assessment of facial nerve function in the clinic. Otolarangol Head Neck Surg 110:156–161CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Neely JG, Wang KX, Shapland CA, Sehizadeh A, Wang A (2010) Computerized objective measurement of facial motion: normal variation and test-retest reliability. Otol Neurotol 31:1488–1492PubMed Neely JG, Wang KX, Shapland CA, Sehizadeh A, Wang A (2010) Computerized objective measurement of facial motion: normal variation and test-retest reliability. Otol Neurotol 31:1488–1492PubMed
22.
go back to reference O’Reilly BF, Soraghan JJ, McGrenary S, He S (2010) Objective method of assessing and presenting the House-Brackmann and regional grades of facial palsy by production of a facogram. Otol Neurotol 31:486–491CrossRefPubMed O’Reilly BF, Soraghan JJ, McGrenary S, He S (2010) Objective method of assessing and presenting the House-Brackmann and regional grades of facial palsy by production of a facogram. Otol Neurotol 31:486–491CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Rickenmann J, Jaquenod C, Cerenko D, Fisch U (1997) Comparative value of facial nerve grading systems. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 117:322–325CrossRefPubMed Rickenmann J, Jaquenod C, Cerenko D, Fisch U (1997) Comparative value of facial nerve grading systems. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 117:322–325CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Ross BG, Fradet G, Nedzelski JM (1996) Development of a sensitive clinical facial grading system. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 114:380–386CrossRefPubMed Ross BG, Fradet G, Nedzelski JM (1996) Development of a sensitive clinical facial grading system. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 114:380–386CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Samii M, Gerganov V (2013) Surgery of cerebellopontine lesions, 1st edn. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 147–314CrossRef Samii M, Gerganov V (2013) Surgery of cerebellopontine lesions, 1st edn. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 147–314CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Scheller C, Wienke A, Tatagiba M et al (2016) Prophylactic nimodipine treatment for cochlear and facial nerve preservation after vestibular schwannoma surgery: a randomized phase III trial. J Neurosurg 124:657–664CrossRefPubMed Scheller C, Wienke A, Tatagiba M et al (2016) Prophylactic nimodipine treatment for cochlear and facial nerve preservation after vestibular schwannoma surgery: a randomized phase III trial. J Neurosurg 124:657–664CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Scriba H, Stoeckli SJ, Veraguth D et al (1999) Objective evaluation of normal facial nerve function. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 108:641–644CrossRefPubMed Scriba H, Stoeckli SJ, Veraguth D et al (1999) Objective evaluation of normal facial nerve function. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 108:641–644CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Smith IM, Murray JA, Cull RE et al (1992) A comparison of facial grading systems. Clin Otolaryngol 17:303–307CrossRefPubMed Smith IM, Murray JA, Cull RE et al (1992) A comparison of facial grading systems. Clin Otolaryngol 17:303–307CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Vrabec JT, Backous D, Dyalilian H et al (2009) Facial nerve grading system 2.0. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 140:445–450CrossRefPubMed Vrabec JT, Backous D, Dyalilian H et al (2009) Facial nerve grading system 2.0. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 140:445–450CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Yuen K, Inokuchi I, Maeta M, Kawakami SI, Masuda Y (1997) Evaluation of facial palsy by moire topography index. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 117:567–572CrossRefPubMed Yuen K, Inokuchi I, Maeta M, Kawakami SI, Masuda Y (1997) Evaluation of facial palsy by moire topography index. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 117:567–572CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Interobserver variability of the House-Brackmann facial nerve grading system for the analysis of a randomized multi-center phase III trial
Authors
Christian Scheller
Andreas Wienke
Marcos Tatagiba
Alireza Gharabaghi
Kristofer F. Ramina
Konstanze Scheller
Julian Prell
Johannes Zenk
Oliver Ganslandt
Barbara Bischoff
Cordula Matthies
Thomas Westermaier
Gregor Antoniadis
Maria Teresa Pedro
Veit Rohde
Kajetan von Eckardstein
Thomas Kretschmer
Malte Kornhuber
Fred G. Barker II
Christian Strauss
Publication date
01-04-2017
Publisher
Springer Vienna
Published in
Acta Neurochirurgica / Issue 4/2017
Print ISSN: 0001-6268
Electronic ISSN: 0942-0940
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-017-3109-0

Other articles of this Issue 4/2017

Acta Neurochirurgica 4/2017 Go to the issue