Dataset Information

Productivity outcomes following endoscopic sinus surgery for recurrent acute rhinosinusitis.

ABSTRACT: We sought to evaluate preoperative and postoperative productivity losses and quality of life (QOL) impairment reported by patients with recurrent acute rhinosinusitis (RARS) as compared to patients with chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyposis (CRSsNP).Prospective, multi-institutional, nested case-control.Participants with RARS (n = 20) and CRSsNP (n = 20) undergoing endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) were enrolled as part of a prospective cohort study. For comparison, participants diagnosed with RARS cases were age/gender-matched to control participants diagnosed with CRSsNP using a 1:1 ratio.RARS and CRSsNP participants were followed for ?14 months postoperatively. Productivity losses were reported as the number of days missed from normal productive activities out of the previous 90 days. RARS participants reported similar baseline productivity losses (12.6 ± 27.1 [standard deviation]) as participants with CRSsNP (11.7 ± 20.9; P = .314). Postoperatively, improvement in productivity losses was similar between RARS participants and CRSsNP controls (-6.7 ± 20.0 vs. -9.8 ± 19.1; P = .253). Preoperative and postoperative disease-specific QOL measures (Sino-Nasal Outcomes Test-22 and Rhinosinusitis Disability Index) were similar between the two groups. RARS participants reported a significant decrease in days of previous antibiotic (P = .009) and nasal decongestant (P = .004) use following ESS, whereas participants with CRSsNP reported a significant decrease in antibiotic (P = .002) and oral corticosteroid use (P = .002).RARS patients report baseline productivity losses and disease-specific QOL impairment to levels that parallel those with CRSsNP. Patients with RARS report improvement in QOL following ESS in all disease-specific QOL measures and in several medication measures. Productivity losses and postoperative improvements are similar between patients with RARS and CRSsNP.3b Laryngoscope, 126:1046-1053, 2016.

SUBMITTER: Steele TO

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4842089 | biostudies-literature | 2016 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Productivity outcomes following endoscopic sinus surgery for recurrent acute rhinosinusitis.

Steele Toby O TO Detwiller Kara Y KY Mace Jess C JC Strong E Bradley EB Smith Timothy L TL Alt Jeremiah A JA

The Laryngoscope 20160109 5

<h4>Objectives/hypothesis</h4>We sought to evaluate preoperative and postoperative productivity losses and quality of life (QOL) impairment reported by patients with recurrent acute rhinosinusitis (RARS) as compared to patients with chronic rhinosinusitis without nasal polyposis (CRSsNP).<h4>Study design</h4>Prospective, multi-institutional, nested case-control.<h4>Methods</h4>Participants with RARS (n = 20) and CRSsNP (n = 20) undergoing endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) were enrolled as part of a ...[more]

PMID: 26749066

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is one of the commonest chronic health problems among adults in the UK. Around 15% of CRS patients undergo functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) annually after failing medical treatment. However, as incomplete resolution of symptoms or complications post-operatively is common, the post-operative management is considered to be as important as the surgery itself. A bioabsorbable corticosteroid-eluting sinus implant (CESI) (Propel®, mometasone furoate 370 µg) has been used as an alternative post-FESS treatment. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of the corticosteroid-eluting implant versus non-corticosteroid-eluting spacer following FESS for treatment of patients with CRS. METHODS:A decision tree model was developed to estimate the cost and effectiveness in each strategy. Costs and effects were estimated from a UK National Health Service (NHS) and personal social services perspective over a 6-month time horizon. Model pathways and parameters were informed by existing clinical guidelines and literature and sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore uncertainties in base-case assumptions. RESULTS:Over a 6-month time horizon, inserting CESI at the end of FESS is less costly (£4646 vs. £4655 per patient) and is the more effective intervention [total quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) over 6 months 0.443 vs. 0.444] than non-corticosteroid-eluting spacers; hence, it is a dominant strategy. The probabilistic analysis results indicate that CESI following FESS has a 62% probability of being cost effective at the £20,000/per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold and 56% probability of being a cost-saving intervention. CONCLUSIONS:The use of CESI after FESS results in fewer post-operative complications than non-corticosteroid-eluting implants and may be a cost-saving technology over a 6-month time horizon. Although the cost of initial treatment with the CESI is greater, cost savings are made due to a reduction in the number of complications experienced.

Project description:ImportanceAlthough oral corticosteroids are commonly prescribed following endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) without nasal polyposis, there are little data to suggest that this is a beneficial practice.ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy of oral corticosteroids following ESS in CRS without polyps.Design, setting, and participantsThis prospective double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized noninferiority clinical trial conducted in a single academic tertiary rhinology practice included adults with CRS without polyps undergoing ESS. Of 81 patients recruited, 72 completed the study.InterventionsPatients were randomized into 2 treatment groups: a 12-day postoperative taper of oral prednisone vs matched placebo tablets. All study patients also received a uniform 2-week postoperative regimen of oral antibiotics, fluticasone nasal spray, and saline rinses.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome measures were Sinonasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) scores and Lund-Kennedy endoscopy scores, collected preoperatively and postoperatively at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. Scores were compared between treatment groups at each time point using longitudinal difference between treatment groups and analyzed using 2-way, repeated measures analysis of variance. Secondary outcome measures included treatment-related adverse effects.ResultsOverall, 72 patients (mean [SD] age, 49.4 [14.9] years; 36 men, 36 women) completed the study, with 33 in the prednisone arm and 39 in the placebo arm. When comparing longitudinal differences between treatment groups, there was no clinically meaningful difference observed in SNOT-22 total (F[4254] = 1.71, η2 = 0.01 [95% CI, 0.00-0.05]) or Lund-Kennedy scores (F[4247] = 1.23, η2 = 0.02 [95% CI, 0.00-0.50]). In SNOT-22 subdomain analyses, there was no clinically meaningful difference between treatment groups for rhinologic, extranasal rhinologic, ear/facial, or sleep subdomains. However, the prednisone group had worse longitudinal scores for psychological dysfunction compared with the placebo group (F[4254] = 3.18, η2 = 0.05 [95% CI, 0.02-0.09]). Reported adverse effects were similar between the 2 treatment groups.Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial of patients with CRS without polyps, oral prednisone following ESS conferred no additional benefit over placebo in terms of SNOT-22 total scores, SNOT-22 rhinologic subscores, or Lund-Kennedy endoscopy scores up to 6 months after surgery. Patients receiving prednisone, however, did demonstrate worse SNOT-22 psychologic subdomain scores. These results suggest that the risks of oral corticosteroids may outweigh the benefits; thus use of oral corticosteroids after ESS for CRS without polyps should be carefully considered.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02748070.

Dataset Information

Productivity outcomes following endoscopic sinus surgery for recurrent acute rhinosinusitis.

Publications

Productivity outcomes following endoscopic sinus surgery for recurrent acute rhinosinusitis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets