Exploring the Relationships Between Clinical Examination Findings, Subjective Reported Symptoms and Objective Nasal Patency Measures in Nasal Obstruction: A Baseline NAIROS Sub-Study Analysis.
anterior rhinoscopy
anterior rhino‐meter
double ordinal airway subjective scale
objective nasal patency measure
peak nasal inspiratory flow
rhinometry
rhino‐spirometer
Journal
Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery
ISSN: 1749-4486
Titre abrégé: Clin Otolaryngol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101247023
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 Sep 2024
08 Sep 2024
Historique:
revised:
29
07
2024
received:
13
12
2023
accepted:
23
08
2024
medline:
9
9
2024
pubmed:
9
9
2024
entrez:
8
9
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
The role of objective nasal airflow measures using peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) and rhinospirometry in supporting clinical examination findings when offering patients septoplasty remain undefined. To explore the baseline relationships between clinical examination findings, subjective reported symptoms and objective nasal patency measures in nasal obstruction. This is a sub-study of the NAIROS trial. Participants with nasal obstruction secondary to septal deviation were included in this NAIROS sub-study. The side of septal deviation, enlargement of inferior turbinate (IT), the need for IT reduction if septoplasty was being performed, the area of septum deflecting into the airway and observer rated airway block (ORAB-arbitrarily divided by <50% and >50% blockage) were assessed by clinicians. The subjective score of nasal obstruction was assessed using the Double Ordinal Assessed Subjective Scale (DOASS). Objective nasal patency measures (e.g., nasal partitioning ratio, [NPR] and PNIF) were measured using PNIF and rhinospirometry. The mean NPR for left-sided, both-sided and right-sided septal deviation was -0.35, -0.02 and 0.51, respectively (p < 0.001). There was very weak correlation between the requirement for IT reduction and PNIF change (0.13, p < 0.01). There was no difference in mean PNIF (94 L/min vs. 93 L/min) and mean DOASS (0.33 vs. 0.38) for participants with ORAB rated <50% and >50%. The mean NPR for participants with ORAB >50% was higher than for those with ORAB <50% (0.51 vs. 0.41, p = 0.002). There was strong correlation between the DOASS and NPR (+0.737, p < 0.001). The mean DOASS score for right-sided, both-sided and left-sided septal deviation was 0.32, 0.05 and -0.29, respectively (p < 0.001). This study identified strong relationships between the clinician rated side of septal deflection, the patient reported DOASS and the objective NPR measurements. NPR and the clinician rated degree of airway blockage were concordant.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The role of objective nasal airflow measures using peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) and rhinospirometry in supporting clinical examination findings when offering patients septoplasty remain undefined.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
To explore the baseline relationships between clinical examination findings, subjective reported symptoms and objective nasal patency measures in nasal obstruction.
METHODS
METHODS
This is a sub-study of the NAIROS trial. Participants with nasal obstruction secondary to septal deviation were included in this NAIROS sub-study. The side of septal deviation, enlargement of inferior turbinate (IT), the need for IT reduction if septoplasty was being performed, the area of septum deflecting into the airway and observer rated airway block (ORAB-arbitrarily divided by <50% and >50% blockage) were assessed by clinicians. The subjective score of nasal obstruction was assessed using the Double Ordinal Assessed Subjective Scale (DOASS). Objective nasal patency measures (e.g., nasal partitioning ratio, [NPR] and PNIF) were measured using PNIF and rhinospirometry.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The mean NPR for left-sided, both-sided and right-sided septal deviation was -0.35, -0.02 and 0.51, respectively (p < 0.001). There was very weak correlation between the requirement for IT reduction and PNIF change (0.13, p < 0.01). There was no difference in mean PNIF (94 L/min vs. 93 L/min) and mean DOASS (0.33 vs. 0.38) for participants with ORAB rated <50% and >50%. The mean NPR for participants with ORAB >50% was higher than for those with ORAB <50% (0.51 vs. 0.41, p = 0.002). There was strong correlation between the DOASS and NPR (+0.737, p < 0.001). The mean DOASS score for right-sided, both-sided and left-sided septal deviation was 0.32, 0.05 and -0.29, respectively (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This study identified strong relationships between the clinician rated side of septal deflection, the patient reported DOASS and the objective NPR measurements. NPR and the clinician rated degree of airway blockage were concordant.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment programme
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Author(s). Clinical Otolaryngology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
M. Ghazizadeh Ahsaie, M. Moshfeghi, B. Abedian, and F. Tajdini, “Prevalence of Nasal Septum Deviation Using Cone‐Beam Computed Tomography: A Cross‐Sectional Study,” Contemporary Clinical Dentistry 11, no. 3 (2020): 223–228.
N. Fettman, T. Sanford, and R. Sindwani, “Surgical Management of the Deviated Septum: Techniques in Septoplasty,” Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America 42, no. 2 (2009): 241–252.
E. Balai, K. Jolly, N. Bhamra, M. S. Osborne, and J. Barraclough, “The Changing Face of Rhinology in the NHS: A Study of Septoplasty, Septorhinoplasty and Rhinoplasty Hospital Episode Statistics,” Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England 103, no. 4 (2021): 291–295.
N. Bhattacharyya, “Ambulatory Sinus and Nasal Surgery in the United States: Demographics and Perioperative Outcomes,” Laryngoscope 120, no. 3 (2010): 635–638.
M. Moore and R. Eccles, “Objective Evidence for the Efficacy of Surgical Management of the Deviated Septum as a Treatment for Chronic Nasal Obstruction: A Systematic Review,” Clinical Otolaryngology 36, no. 2 (2011): 106–113.
K. Valsamidis, K. Titelis, D. Rachovitsas, I. Konstantinidis, K. Markou, and S. Triaridis, “Long‐Term Evaluation of Nasal Septoplasty Followed by Inferior Turbinate Cauterization for the Treatment of Nasal Obstruction Using Objective and Subjective Methods,” International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology 22, no. 3 (2018): 284–290.
L. Pedersen, L. Schiöler, S. Finjan, et al., “Prognostic Factors for Outcome After Septoplasty in 888 Patients From the Swedish National Septoplasty Register,” European Archives of Oto‐Rhino‐Laryngology 276, no. 8 (2019): 2223–2228.
N. Susaman and H. Çetiner, “Is Septoplasty Required Whenever Anterior Septal Deviation Is Present?” Journal of Laryngology and Otology 137, no. 4 (2022): 404–407.
T. Aziz, V. L. Biron, K. Ansari, and C. Flores‐Mir, “Measurement Tools for the Diagnosis of Nasal Septal Deviation: A Systematic Review,” Journal of Otolaryngology‐Head & Neck Surgery 43, no. 1 (2014): 11.
P. Panagou, S. Loukides, and S. Tsipra, “Evaluation of Nasal Patency: Comparison of Patient and Clinician Assessments With Rhinomanometry,” Acta Oto‐Laryngologica 118, no. 6 (1998): 847–851.
S. Carrie, J. O'Hara, T. Fouweather, et al., “Clinical Effectiveness of Septoplasty Versus Medical Management for Nasal Airways Obstruction: Multicentre, Open Label, Randomised Controlled Trial,” British Medical Journal 383 (2023): e075445.
K. J. Rennie, J. O'Hara, N. Rousseau, et al., “Nasal Airway Obstruction Study (NAIROS): A Phase III, Open‐Label, Mixed‐Methods, Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial of Septoplasty Versus Medical Management of a Septal Deviation With Nasal Obstruction,” Trials 21, no. 1 (2020): 179.
M. G. Stewart, D. L. Witsell, T. L. Smith, E. M. Weaver, B. Yueh, and M. T. Hannley, “Development and Validation of the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (Nose) scale1,” Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery 130, no. 2 (2004): 157–163.
J. M. Boyce and R. Eccles, “Assessment of Subjective Scales for Selection of Patients for Nasal Septal Surgery,” Clinical Otolaryngology 31, no. 4 (2006): 297–302.
S. A. Hensch and J. D. Evans, “Straightforward Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences,” in Study Guide for Evans' Straightforward Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, vol. 91 (Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole Pub. Co., 1996), 1750.
H. M. Ozkul, H. H. Balikci, M. M. Gurdal, et al., “Normal Range of Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow and Its Role in Nasal Septal Surgery,” Journal of Craniofacial Surgery 24, no. 3 (2013): 900–902.
G. Ottaviano and W. J. Fokkens, “Measurements of Nasal Airflow and Patency: A Critical Review With Emphasis on the Use of Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow in Daily Practice,” Allergy 71, no. 2 (2016): 162–174.
D. G. Roblin and R. Eccles, “Normal Range for Nasal Partitioning of Airflow Determined by Nasal Spirometry in 100 Healthy Subjects,” American Journal of Rhinology 17, no. 4 (2003): 179–183.
J. M. Bock, M. Schien, C. Fischer, et al., “Importance to Question Sinonasal Symptoms and to Perform Rhinoscopy and Rhinomanometry in Cystic Fibrosis Patients,” Pediatric Pulmonology 52, no. 2 (2016): 167–174.
M. H. Dadgarnia, M. H. Baradaranfar, M. Mazidi, and S. M. Azimi Meibodi, “Assessment of Septoplasty Effectiveness Using Acoustic Rhinometry and Rhinomanometry,” Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology 25, no. 71 (2013): 71–78.
H. J. Welkoborsky, C. Rose‐Diekmann, A. P. Vor der Holte, and H. Ott, “Clinical Parameters Influencing the Results of Anterior Rhinomanometry in Children,” European Archives of Oto‐Rhino‐Laryngology 279, no. 8 (2022): 3963–3972.
P. L. Huygen, A. B. Klaassen, T. J. de Leeuw, and R. T. Wentges, “Rhinomanometric Detection Rate of Rhinoscopically‐Assessed Septal Deviations,” Rhinology 30, no. 3 (1992): 177–181.
G. Fyrmpas, D. Kyrmizakis, V. Vital, and J. Constantinidis, “The Value of Bilateral Simultaneous Nasal Spirometry in the Assessment of Patients Undergoing Septoplasty,” Rhinology 49, no. 3 (2011): 297–303.
R. Kahana‐Zweig, M. Geva‐Sagiv, A. Weissbrod, L. Secundo, N. Soroker, and N. Sobel, “Measuring and Characterizing the Human Nasal Cycle,” PLoS One 11, no. 10 (2016): e0162918.
R. Nathan, R. Eccles, P. Howarth, S. Steinsvag, and A. Togias, “Objective Monitoring of Nasal Patency and Nasal Physiology in Rhinitis,” Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 115, no. 3 (2005): S442–S459.