Skip to main content
Log in

Analysis of Clinicians’ Perceptual Cough Evaluation

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Dysphagia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examined the relationships between subjective descriptors and objective airflow measures of cough. We hypothesized that coughs with specific airflow characteristics would share common subjective perceptual descriptions. Thirty clinicians (speech-language pathologists, otolaryngologists, and neurologists) perceptually evaluated ten cough audio samples with specific airflow characteristics determined by peak expiratory flow rate, cough expired volume, cough duration, and number of coughs in the cough epoch. Participants rated coughs by strength, duration, quality, quantity, and overall potential effectiveness for airway protection. Perception of cough strength and effectiveness was determined by the combination of presence of pre-expulsive compression phase, short peak expiratory airflow rate rise time, high peak expiratory flow rates, and high cough volume acceleration. Perception of cough abnormality was defined predominantly by descriptors of breathiness and strain. Breathiness was characteristic for coughs with either absent compression phases and relatively high expiratory airflow rates or coughs with significantly low expired volumes and reduced peak flow rates. In contrast, excessive strain was associated with prolonged compression phases and low expiratory airflow rates or the absence of compression phase with high peak expiratory rates. The study participants reached greatest agreement in distinguishing between single and multiple coughs. Their assessment of cough strength and effectiveness was less consistent. Finally, the least agreement was shown in determining the quality categories. Modifications of cough airflow can influence perceptual cough evaluation outcomes. However, the inconsistency of cough ratings among our participants suggests that a uniform cough rating system is required.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fontana GA, Widdicombe J. What is cough and what should be measured? Pulm Pharmacol Ther. 2007;20(4):307–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Smith Hammond CA. Predicting aspiration in patients with ischemic stroke: comparison of clinical signs and aerodynamic measures of voluntary cough. Chest. 2009;135(3):769–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Abaza A, et al. Classification of voluntary cough sound and airflow patterns for detecting abnormal pulmonary function. Cough. 2009;5(1):8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Piirilä P, Sovijärvi AR. Differences in acoustic and dynamic characteristics of spontaneous cough in pulmonary diseases. Chest. 1989;96(1):46–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Thorpe W, et al. Acoustic analysis of cough. In: intelligent information systems conference, The Seventh Australian and New Zealand 2001. 2001.

  6. Knocikova J, et al. Wavelet analysis of voluntary cough sound in patients with respiratory diseases. J Physiol Pharmacol. 2008;59(Suppl 6):331–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Korpáš J, Sadloňová J, Vrabec M. Analysis of the cough sound: an overview. Pulmonary Pharmacology. 1996;9(5–6):261–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Smith J, et al. The description of cough sounds by healthcare professionals. Cough. 2006;2(1):1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Pitts T, et al. Voluntary cough production and swallow dysfunction in parkinson’s disease. Dysphagia. 2008;23(3):297–301.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Hegland KW, Okun MS, Troche MS. Sequential voluntary cough and aspiration or aspiration risk in Parkinson’s disease. Lung. 2014;192(4):601–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Hegland KW, et al. Comparison of voluntary and reflex cough effectiveness in Parkinson’s disease. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2014;20(11):1226–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Troche MS, et al. A framework for understanding shared substrates of airway protection. J Appl Oral Sci. 2014;22(4):251–60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Miles A, Huckabee ML. Intra- and inter-rater reliability for judgement of cough following citric acid inhalation. Int J Speech-Lang Pathol. 2013;15(2):209–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Miles A, McFarlane M, Huckabee M-L. Inter-rater reliability for judgment of cough following citric acid inhalation after training. Speech, Lang Hear. 2014;17(4):204–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Daniels SK, et al. Clinical assessment of swallowing and prediction of dysphagia severity. Am J Speech-Lang Pathol. 1997;6(4):17–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mathers-Schmidt BA, Kurlinski M. Dysphagia evaluation practices: inconsistencies in clinical assessment and instrumental examination decision-making. Dysphagia. 2003;18(2):114–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Murty G, Lancaster P, Kelly P. Cough intensity in patients with a vocal cord palsy*. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1991;16(3):248–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Fontana GA, et al. Coughing in Laryngectomized Patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1999;160(5):1578–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Helena Laciuga.

Additional information

This work was performed at the University of Florida.

Appendix

Appendix

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Laciuga, H., Brandimore, A.E., Troche, M.S. et al. Analysis of Clinicians’ Perceptual Cough Evaluation. Dysphagia 31, 521–530 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-016-9708-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00455-016-9708-8

Keywords

Navigation