1
|
Carrie S, Fouweather T, Homer T, O'Hara J, Rousseau N, Rooshenas L, Bray A, Stocken DD, Ternent L, Rennie K, Clark E, Waugh N, Steel AJ, Dooley J, Drinnan M, Hamilton D, Lloyd K, Oluboyede Y, Wilson C, Gardiner Q, Kara N, Khwaja S, Leong SC, Maini S, Morrison J, Nix P, Wilson JA, Teare MD. Effectiveness of septoplasty compared to medical management in adults with obstruction associated with a deviated nasal septum: the NAIROS RCT. Health Technol Assess 2024; 28:1-213. [PMID: 38477237 PMCID: PMC11017631 DOI: 10.3310/mvfr4028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/14/2024] Open
Abstract
Background The indications for septoplasty are practice-based, rather than evidence-based. In addition, internationally accepted guidelines for the management of nasal obstruction associated with nasal septal deviation are lacking. Objective The objective was to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of septoplasty, with or without turbinate reduction, compared with medical management, in the management of nasal obstruction associated with a deviated nasal septum. Design This was a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing septoplasty, with or without turbinate reduction, with defined medical management; it incorporated a mixed-methods process evaluation and an economic evaluation. Setting The trial was set in 17 NHS secondary care hospitals in the UK. Participants A total of 378 eligible participants aged > 18 years were recruited. Interventions Participants were randomised on a 1: 1 basis and stratified by baseline severity and gender to either (1) septoplasty, with or without turbinate surgery (n = 188) or (2) medical management with intranasal steroid spray and saline spray (n = 190). Main outcome measures The primary outcome was the Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items score at 6 months (patient-reported outcome). The secondary outcomes were as follows: patient-reported outcomes - Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation score at 6 and 12 months, Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items subscales at 12 months, Double Ordinal Airway Subjective Scale at 6 and 12 months, the Short Form questionnaire-36 items and costs; objective measurements - peak nasal inspiratory flow and rhinospirometry. The number of adverse events experienced was also recorded. A within-trial economic evaluation from an NHS and Personal Social Services perspective estimated the incremental cost per (1) improvement (of ≥ 9 points) in Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items score, (2) adverse event avoided and (3) quality-adjusted life-year gained at 12 months. An economic model estimated the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained at 24 and 36 months. A mixed-methods process evaluation was undertaken to understand/address recruitment issues and examine the acceptability of trial processes and treatment arms. Results At the 6-month time point, 307 participants provided primary outcome data (septoplasty, n = 152; medical management, n = 155). An intention-to-treat analysis revealed a greater and more sustained improvement in the primary outcome measure in the surgical arm. The 6-month mean Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items scores were -20.0 points lower (better) for participants randomised to septoplasty than for those randomised to medical management [the score for the septoplasty arm was 19.9 and the score for the medical management arm was 39.5 (95% confidence interval -23.6 to -16.4; p < 0.0001)]. This was confirmed by sensitivity analyses and through the analysis of secondary outcomes. Outcomes were statistically significantly related to baseline severity, but not to gender or turbinate reduction. In the surgical and medical management arms, 132 and 95 adverse events occurred, respectively; 14 serious adverse events occurred in the surgical arm and nine in the medical management arm. On average, septoplasty was more costly and more effective in improving Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items scores and quality-adjusted life-years than medical management, but incurred a larger number of adverse events. Septoplasty had a 15% probability of being considered cost-effective at 12 months at a £20,000 willingness-to-pay threshold for an additional quality-adjusted life-year. This probability increased to 99% and 100% at 24 and 36 months, respectively. Limitations COVID-19 had an impact on participant-facing data collection from March 2020. Conclusions Septoplasty, with or without turbinate reduction, is more effective than medical management with a nasal steroid and saline spray. Baseline severity predicts the degree of improvement in symptoms. Septoplasty has a low probability of cost-effectiveness at 12 months, but may be considered cost-effective at 24 months. Future work should focus on developing a septoplasty patient decision aid. Trial registration This trial is registered as ISRCTN16168569 and EudraCT 2017-000893-12. Funding This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 14/226/07) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 10. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sean Carrie
- Ear, Nose and Throat Department, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
- Honorary affiliation with Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Tony Fouweather
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Tara Homer
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - James O'Hara
- Ear, Nose and Throat Department, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Nikki Rousseau
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Leila Rooshenas
- Bristol Population Health Science Institute, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Alison Bray
- Honorary affiliation with Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
- Northern Medical Physics and Clinical Engineering, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Deborah D Stocken
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Laura Ternent
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Katherine Rennie
- Newcastle Clinical Trials Unit, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Emma Clark
- Newcastle Clinical Trials Unit, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Nichola Waugh
- Newcastle Clinical Trials Unit, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Alison J Steel
- Newcastle Clinical Trials Unit, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Jemima Dooley
- Centre for Academic Primary Care, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Michael Drinnan
- Honorary affiliation with Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
- Northern Medical Physics and Clinical Engineering, Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - David Hamilton
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Kelly Lloyd
- Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Yemi Oluboyede
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Caroline Wilson
- Bristol Population Health Science Institute, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Quentin Gardiner
- Ear, Nose and Throat Department, Ninewells Hospital, NHS Tayside, Dundee, UK
| | - Naveed Kara
- Ear, Nose and Throat Department, Darlington Memorial Hospital, County Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust, Durham, UK
| | - Sadie Khwaja
- Ear, Nose and Throat Department, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester University Foundation NHS Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Samuel Chee Leong
- Ear, Nose and Throat Department, Aintree Hospital, Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Sangeeta Maini
- Ear, Nose and Throat Department, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, NHS Grampian, Aberdeen, UK
| | | | - Paul Nix
- Ear, Nose and Throat Department, Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Janet A Wilson
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - M Dawn Teare
- Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Krasilnikova SV, Kolesnik AS, Gorbunova KV, Eliseeva TI, Shakhov AV. [Peak nasal inspiratory flow in the assessment of nasal airway obstruction]. Vestn Otorinolaringol 2024; 89:47-53. [PMID: 39171877 DOI: 10.17116/otorino20248904147] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/23/2024]
Abstract
RELEVANCE Nasal congestion is one of the most common complaints in otolaryngology practice and can significantly impact the quality of life for patients. Objective and subjective assessments provide different information, but objective assessment of nasal obstruction is crucial for accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment. This review demonstrates that peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) is a reproducible and reliable measure of objective nasal patency. It is inexpensive, easy to use, suitable for serial measurements, and can be applied to patients of different age groups. PNIF is recommended for use in every outpatient clinic that treats patients with nasal congestion. OBJECTIVE To summarize the data on the application of PNIF in diagnosing conditions of the nasal airways. MATERIAL AND METHODS Publications (articles and relevant abstracts) available in the PubMed and eLibrary databases were analyzed. CONCLUSION PNIF offers an objective and non-invasive assessment of nasal airflow, aiding in diagnosis, therapy monitoring, and preoperative planning. Further research, standardization, and establishment of normative data will enhance the informative value of peak nasal inspiratory flow in assessing nasal obstruction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S V Krasilnikova
- Privolzhsky Research Medical University, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia
| | | | - K V Gorbunova
- Privolzhsky Research Medical University, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia
| | - T I Eliseeva
- Privolzhsky Research Medical University, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia
| | - A V Shakhov
- Privolzhsky Research Medical University, Nizhny Novgorod, Russia
| |
Collapse
|