Exploring possibilities for shortening the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) using item response theory

Nasal Irrigation Improves the Nasal Related Quality of Life in Patients Undergoing Transsphenoidal Resection of Pituitary Adenoma

Background: After transsphenoidal pituitary adenoma resection patients have reduced olfactory function and quality of life. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of nasal irrigation on the nasal related quality of life in patients undergoing transsphenoidal pituitary adenoma resection. Methods: Patients undergoing transsphenoidal resection of pituitary adenomas in a tertiary hospital in China were included. The patients were randomly divided into a control group and nasal irrigation group according to the random sequence generated by the SPSS22.0 software. The 22-item sino-nasal outcome test (SNOT-22) was used to evaluate nasal related quality of life; lower SNOT-22 scores indicate a higher quality of life. The Toyota and Takagi (T&T) olfactometer test was used to evaluate the olfactory function of patients. Results: A total of 82 patients were finally included. The SNOT-22 scores of both groups after surgery were significantly higher than those before surgery (p < .05). The total SNOT-22 score of nasal irrigation group at one month (23.45 ± 3.72 vs. 27.48 ± 4.07) and three months (15.83 ± 2.86 vs. 21.82 ± 3.36) after surgery was lower than that in the control group (p < .05). There was no significant difference in olfactory function between the two groups at one month and three months after surgery (p > .05). The nasal mucosal score in the nasal irrigation group was significantly improved compared with the control group at one month and three months after surgery (p < .05). Conclusion: Nasal irrigation is associated with improved quality of life in patients undergoing transsphenoidal pituitary adenoma resection compared with the control group.

A scoping review of Rasch analysis and item response theory in otolaryngology: Implications and future possibilities

Objective

Item response theory (IRT) is a methodological approach to studying the psychometric performance of outcome measures. This study aims to determine and summarize the use of IRT in otolaryngological scientific literature.

Methods

A systematic search of the Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases was performed for original English-language published studies indexed up to January 28, 2023, per the following search strategy: ("item response theory" OR "irt" OR "rasch" OR "latent trait theory" OR "modern mental test theory") AND ("ent" OR "otorhinolaryngology" OR "ear" OR "nose" OR "throat" OR "otology" OR "audiology" OR "rhinology" OR "laryngology" OR "neurotology" OR "facial plastic surgery").

Results

Fifty-five studies were included in this review. IRT was used across all subspecialties in otolaryngology, and most studies utilizing IRT methodology were published within the last decade. Most studies analyzed polytomous response data, and the most commonly used IRT models were the partial credit and the rating scale model. There was considerable heterogeneity in reporting the main assumptions and results of IRT.

Conclusion

IRT is increasingly being used in the otolaryngological scientific literature. In the otolaryngology literature, IRT is most frequently used in the study of patient-reported outcome measures and many different IRT-based methods have been used. Future IRT-based outcome studies, using standardized reporting guidelines, might improve otolaryngology-outcome research sustainably by improving response rates and reducing patient response burden.

Level of evidence

2.

Development and Validation of the Sinonasal Outcome Test-12

OBJECTIVES

Quality of life (QoL) questionnaires are widely used in clinical interviews to assess the impact of medical interventions or measure the outcomes of healthcare services. The main aim of such questionnaires is the subjective assessment of health status and its impact on QoL. This study aimed to develop an efficient, short sinonasal disease assessment instrument, the sinonasal outcomes test-12 (SNOT-12), and to compare it with the preexisting SNOT-22.

METHODS

This was a two-phase cross-sectional study. The study was performed between June 2019 and February 2020 using the electronic files of the ORL department outpatient clinics at King Fahd University Hospital, affiliated with Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University. The study was performed in 2 phases: an item reduction phase, which resulted in an initial SNOT-12 scale, and a validation phase, using a comparative analysis of the initial SNOT-12 and the SNOT-22.

RESULTS

The developed short-form SNOT-12 maintained the 4 latent factors extracted in EFA (nasal, Sleep/extra nasal, psychological, ear/facial). It strongly correlated with SNOT-22 (r = 0.973). It had good construct reliability (0.705-0.901) and validity and a higher discrimination power than the SNOT-22.

CONCLUSIONS

The SNOT-12 is a short, valid, and reliable instrument that may prove useful for the initial screening and monitoring of patients with chronic rhinosinusitis.

Discordance of chronic rhinosinusitis disease control between EPOS guidelines and patient perspectives identifies utility of patient-rated control assessment

Background: The objective of this study was to determine concordance of patient-reported chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) disease control with CRS disease control assessed according to European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS) criteria. Methods: In 421 participants, CRS disease control was determined using EPOS criteria which include the burden of 5 symptoms measured on a binary scale, use of rescue medications in the prior 6 months and presence of diseased mucosa on nasal endoscopy. Symptom severity was also assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Participants rated their CRS disease control as “controlled”, “partly controlled” or “uncontrolled”. Results: Patient-reported and EPOS-based CRS disease control ratings agreed for 49.6% of participants. Amongst cases of disagreement, EPOS guidelines assessed worse CRS disease control relative to 92.9% of patients. Facial pain/pressure and impaired sense of smell distinctly associated with patient agreement with EPOS guidelines on having “uncontrolled” CRS. Higher VAS symptom scores were associated with worse patient-reported CRS disease control (i.e., agreeing with EPOS guidelines). Removal of the nasal endoscopy criterion improved agreement between patients’ and EPOS control assessments, and replacement of this criterion with patient-reported control further aligned EPOS guidelines with patient perspectives. Conclusions: EPOS guidelines regularly assess worse CRS control than assessed by patients. The lack of more gradated symptom severity criteria and inclusion of nasal endoscopy may contribute to discordance of EPOS guidelines with patient-reported CRS control. Replacement of nasal endoscopy findings with a measure of patient-reported CRS disease control better aligns EPOS CRS disease control guidelines with patients’ perspectives.

Dedicated Olfaction and Taste Items do not Improve Psychometric Performance of the SNOT-22

Objective

Previous work has shown the chemosensory dysfunction item of the 22‐item Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT‐22) that assesses problems with “taste/smell” has poor psychometric performance compared with other items on the SNOT‐22, which we have hypothesized is due to the simultaneous assessment of two different senses. Our aim was to determine whether distinct smell and taste items in the SNOT‐22 would improve psychometric performance.

Methods

One hundred and eighty‐one CRS patients were recruited and completed the SNOT‐22. Additional items querying problems with the senses of “smell” and “taste,” using the same response scale and recall period were given to study participants. Item response theory (IRT) was used to determine IRT parameters, including item discrimination, difficulty, and information provided by each SNOT‐22 item.

Results

Confirming previous studies, the chemosensory item of the SNOT‐22 (reflecting “taste/smell”) had poor psychometric performance. Use of a distinct smell or taste item instead of the combined “taste/smell” item did not improve psychometric performance. However, a dedicated smell question resulted in a left shift of threshold parameters, showing that the dedicated smell item better captures moderate CRS disease burden than the original taste/smell item of the SNOT‐22, which by virtue of near‐identical IRT parameters appears to more greatly reflect problems with taste.

Conclusions

A dedicated smell‐ or taste‐specific item, rather than the combined “taste/smell” item currently in the SNOT‐22 does not provide significantly greater psychometric performance. However, a dedicated smell item may better capture moderate CRS disease burden compared with the current chemosensory item on the SNOT‐22. Laryngoscope, 132:1644–1651, 2022