A UK survey of current ENT practice in the assessment of nasal patency

被引:11
作者
Andrews, P. [1 ]
Joseph, J. [1 ]
Li, C-H [2 ]
Nip, L. [2 ]
Jacques, T. [3 ]
Leung, T. [2 ]
机构
[1] Nose & Ear Hosp, Royal Natl Throat, London, England
[2] Univ Coll London, Dept Med Phys & Bioengn, Romford, Essex, England
[3] Queens Hosp, Dept Otolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Romford, Essex, England
关键词
Nose; Nasal Cavity; Rhinoplasty; Nasal Obstruction; Symptom Assessment; SEPTORHINOPLASTY SURGERY; ACOUSTIC RHINOMETRY; OBSTRUCTION; VALIDATION; DIAGNOSIS;
D O I
10.1017/S0022215117001311
中图分类号
R76 [耳鼻咽喉科学];
学科分类号
100213 ;
摘要
Background: Nasal obstruction is a common ENT complaint; however, decisions on its management are challenging, with high rates of dissatisfaction following surgery. This study investigated the practice of UK clinicians in the evaluation of nasal patency. Method: Seventy-eight UK-based rhinologists were surveyed at the 2015 British Academic Conference in Otolaryngology. Results: Clinical history and examination are almost universally used to evaluate nasal blockage. The most commonly used test was the nasal misting pattern (73 per cent), followed by peak nasal inspiratory flow (19 per cent). The Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 22 or 23 was utilised by 29 per cent of respondents. Sixty-three per cent of respondents reported that a lack of equipment was the principle reason for not using objective measures, followed by time constraints and a lack of correlation with symptom scores. Conclusion: British clinicians rely on clinical skills to evaluate nasal blockage. There is a desire for a simple, non-invasive device that objectively measures airflow for nasal breathing during physiological resting and correlates with subjective symptom scores.
引用
收藏
页码:702 / 706
页数:5
相关论文
共 16 条
[1]   The need for an objective measure in septorhinoplasty surgery: are we any closer to finding an answer? [J].
Andrews, P. J. ;
Choudhury, N. ;
Takhar, A. ;
Poirrier, A. L. ;
Jacques, T. ;
Randhawa, P. S. .
CLINICAL OTOLARYNGOLOGY, 2015, 40 (06) :698-703
[2]  
Chandra RK, 2009, OTOLARYNG CLIN N AM, V42, P207, DOI [10.1016/j.otc.2009.07.010, 10.1016/j.otc.2009.01.004]
[3]  
Chaves C, 2014, RHINOLOGY, V52, P99, DOI [10.4193/Rhin13.109, 10.4193/Rhino13.109]
[4]   Critical evaluation of different objective techniques of nasal airway assessment: a clinical review [J].
Clement, P. A. R. ;
Halewyck, S. ;
Gordts, F. ;
Michel, O. .
EUROPEAN ARCHIVES OF OTO-RHINO-LARYNGOLOGY, 2014, 271 (10) :2617-2625
[5]   A comparison of the nasal cross-sectional areas and volumes obtained with acoustic rhinometry and magnetic resonance imaging [J].
Corey, JP ;
Gungor, A ;
Nelson, R ;
Fredberg, J ;
Lai, V .
OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD AND NECK SURGERY, 1997, 117 (04) :349-354
[6]  
Hellings PW, 2012, RHINOLOGY, V50, P339, DOI [10.4193/Rhino11.252, 10.4193/Rhin11.252]
[7]  
Hilberg O, 2002, ALLERGY, V57, P5, DOI 10.1046/j.0908-665x.2001.all.doc.x
[8]   Psychometric validity of the 22-item Sinonasal Outcome Test [J].
Hopkins, C. ;
Gillett, S. ;
Slack, R. ;
Lund, V. J. ;
Browne, J. P. .
CLINICAL OTOLARYNGOLOGY, 2009, 34 (05) :447-454
[9]   Definition, prevalence and development of nasal obstruction [J].
Jessen, M ;
Malm, L .
ALLERGY, 1997, 52 :3-6
[10]  
LUND VJ, 1989, OTOLARYNG CLIN N AM, V22, P279