Search

Background: Sinusitis can significantly decrease quality of life, is costly in both health care expenditure and lost productivity, and can lead to complications if treatment is delayed. Our objective was to explore disparities in health care access among adults with sinusitis based on sociodemographic factors. Methods: A total of 32,994 participants (representing 244,838,261 US adults) who completed the 2016 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) were analyzed, of whom 12.17% were diagnosed with sinusitis at least once in the prior 12 months. Multivariate regression analyses were performed. Results: In regression analyses, female sex (odds ratio [OR], 2.00 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.79‐2.24]; p < 0.001) and older age groups were associated with increased odds of having sinusitis. Within the sinusitis cohort, Asian race (OR, 5.97 [95% CI, 1.61‐22.12]; p = 0.008) and Hispanic ethnicity (OR, 6.97 [95% CI, 3.22‐15.06]; p < 0.001) were associated with increased odds of obtaining foreign medications. Individuals with Medicaid had decreased odds of delaying care (OR, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.25‐0.56]; p < 0.001) or not receiving care due to cost (OR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.24‐0.65]; p < 0.001), but increased odds of delaying care due to transportation barriers (OR, 4.64 [95% CI, 2.52‐8.55]; p < 0.001). Uninsured individuals had higher odds for delaying care (OR, 4.97 [95% CI, 3.35‐7.38]; p < 0.001) and not receiving care (OR, 5.46 [95% CI, 3.56‐8.38]; p < 0.001) due to cost. Income >$100,000 was associated with a nearly 90% reduction in inability to obtain care due to cost (OR, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.05‐0.21]; p < 0.001) and an over 99% reduction in inability to obtain care due to transportation issues compared with income < $35,000 (OR, 0.01 [95% CI, 0.00‐0.04]; p< 0.001). Conclusion: Significant disparities in health care access based on race, health insurance status, and income exist among adults with sinusitis in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In uncomplicated chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), a consensus regarding appropriate medical therapy (AMT) before surgical intervention has been published in the form of "appropriateness criteria" for endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). We sought to determine why tertiary surgeons may deviate from the suggested criteria and evaluated whether those deviations result in change in outcomes., Methods: Patients with uncomplicated CRS were prospectively enrolled over the course of 1 year. The 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcomes Test (SNOT-22), a general health outcome out of 100, and a physician form, indicating management pathway and decision making, was completed at each visit over a 6-month follow-up period. A descriptive analysis was used to quantify reasons for veering from the "appropriateness criteria," and repeated linear regression modeling was used to measure whether compliance impacted SNOT-22, general health, and Lund-Kennedy (LK) scores over the period of study., Results: One hundred fifty-five patients were enrolled. Sixty-eight percent followed the appropriate management pathway based on their presentation and the suggested criteria. Disparate reasons were documented for deviation in the other 32%, and, despite establishing several predictive categories, "other" was the most common reason, with various explanations well documented. SNOT-22, general health, and LK scores were not statistically impacted by compliancy status (p > 0.05)., Conclusion: The suggested "appropriateness criteria" predict a management pathway for the majority of CRS patients. However, in a tertiary sinus center, surgeons may deviate from that model with a significant minority of their patients, for multiple reasons, without causing a change in outcomes., (© 2018 ARS-AAOA, LLC.)

Background: While Eustachian tube dysfunction (ETD) is a known comorbidity of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), the prevalence of ETD symptoms in the CRS population is poorly understood. We sought to determine the cross-sectional prevalence of ETD in patients with CRS using the validated Eustachian Tube Dysfunction Questionnaire (ETDQ-7) and to correlate ETDQ-7 scores with 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) scores, endoscopy scores, and computed tomography (CT) scores., Methods: A total of 101 patients with confirmed CRS completed the ETDQ-7 and SNOT-22 at their initial visit to our rhinology clinic. Lund-Mackay CT and Lund-Kennedy endoscopy scores were also obtained. Spearman's correlation coefficient (ρ) was calculated., Results: Among the 101 patients, 49 patients (48.5%) had an ETDQ-7 score of ≥14.5, signifying clinically significant ETD. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) ETDQ-7 score of the entire cohort was 17.8 ± 10.1. There was a moderately strong correlation between ETDQ-7 and the SNOT-22 ear subdomain (ρ = 0.691, p < 0.001). The correlation coefficient between ETDQ-7 and total SNOT-22 scores was ρ = 0.491 (p < 0.001), indicating moderate correlation. ETDQ-7 scores were poorly correlated to objective measures of sinonasal disease, including Lund-Mackay CT score (ρ = -0.055, p = 0.594) and Lund-Kennedy endoscopy score (ρ = -0.099, p = 0.334)., Conclusion: Symptoms of ETD are highly prevalent among patients with CRS as documented by patient-reported outcome measures. The correlation between ETDQ-7 scores and SNOT-22 ear subdomain scores is moderately strong, while the correlation between ETDQ-7 scores and SNOT-22 scores is moderate. ETD severity does not correlate with CT score or nasal endoscopy score., (© 2017 ARS-AAOA, LLC.)

Objective: Rhinologists are seeing an increasing number of immunosuppressed patients. Currently, no treatment paradigm exists for treating acute and chronic noninvasive rhinosinusitis (ARS, CRS) in this growing population. This study aims to identify patient and treatment factors that affect rhinosinusitis outcomes in this vulnerable population., Study Design: Prognostic retrospective cohort study., Methods: Immunocompromised patients treated by rhinologists for ARS or CRS 10/2007 to 10/2012 were identified by rhinosinusitis diagnostic codes, codes for transplant, cancer, HIV, diabetes, and codes indicating immunosuppression in the intensive care setting. Associations between patient factors and outcome were analyzed by logistic regression. Associations between treatment and outcome were analyzed by Firth logistic regression., Results: A total of 132 subjects were identified. Of those, 90.9% had CRS and 9.1% had ARS; 12.9% were transplant patients; 47% were diabetic; 37.9% were cancer patients; and 16.7% were in the intensive care unit. Patients with higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores had decreased disease resolution (odds ratio [OR] = 0.5, P = 0.021). Transplant patients (OR = 22.5, P = 0.001), diabetics patients (OR = 6.4, P = 0.017), cancer patients (OR = 5.4, P = 0.046), and patients with prior medical therapy for rhinosinusitis (OR = 5.84, P < 0.001) had increased disease resolution compared to immunosuppressed critical care patients. Patients treated with antibiotics alone had no statistically significant difference in disease resolution compared to those receiving no treatment. In contrast, treatment plans including surgery were associated with greater disease resolution., Conclusion: This data indicates that surgical treatment provides improved outcomes for patients presenting with acute exacerbations of rhinosinusitis related to their immunocompromised state. Given the limited study population, these findings may not apply to HIV-positive or ARS patients, and further study should be undertaken in these groups., Level of Evidence: 4., (© 2015 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

Objective: This update of a 2007 guideline from the American Academy of Otolaryngology--Head and Neck Surgery Foundation provides evidence-based recommendations to manage adult rhinosinusitis, defined as symptomatic inflammation of the paranasal sinuses and nasal cavity. Changes from the prior guideline include a consumer added to the update group, evidence from 42 new systematic reviews, enhanced information on patient education and counseling, a new algorithm to clarify action statement relationships, expanded opportunities for watchful waiting (without antibiotic therapy) as initial therapy of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS), and 3 new recommendations for managing chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS)., Purpose: The purpose of this multidisciplinary guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities in managing adult rhinosinusitis and to create explicit and actionable recommendations to implement these opportunities in clinical practice. Specifically, the goals are to improve diagnostic accuracy for adult rhinosinusitis, promote appropriate use of ancillary tests to confirm diagnosis and guide management, and promote judicious use of systemic and topical therapy, which includes radiography, nasal endoscopy, computed tomography, and testing for allergy and immune function. Emphasis was also placed on identifying multiple chronic conditions that would modify management of rhinosinusitis, including asthma, cystic fibrosis, immunocompromised state, and ciliary dyskinesia., Action Statements: The update group made strong recommendations that clinicians (1) should distinguish presumed ABRS from acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) caused by viral upper respiratory infections and noninfectious conditions and (2) should confirm a clinical diagnosis of CRS with objective documentation of sinonasal inflammation, which may be accomplished using anterior rhinoscopy, nasal endoscopy, or computed tomography. The update group made recommendations that clinicians (1) should either offer watchful waiting (without antibiotics) or prescribe initial antibiotic therapy for adults with uncomplicated ABRS; (2) should prescribe amoxicillin with or without clavulanate as first-line therapy for 5 to 10 days (if a decision is made to treat ABRS with an antibiotic); (3) should reassess the patient to confirm ABRS, exclude other causes of illness, and detect complications if the patient worsens or fails to improve with the initial management option by 7 days after diagnosis or worsens during the initial management; (4) should distinguish CRS and recurrent ARS from isolated episodes of ABRS and other causes of sinonasal symptoms; (5) should assess the patient with CRS or recurrent ARS for multiple chronic conditions that would modify management, such as asthma, cystic fibrosis, immunocompromised state, and ciliary dyskinesia; (6) should confirm the presence or absence of nasal polyps in a patient with CRS; and (7) should recommend saline nasal irrigation, topical intranasal corticosteroids, or both for symptom relief of CRS. The update group stated as options that clinicians may (1) recommend analgesics, topical intranasal steroids, and/or nasal saline irrigation for symptomatic relief of viral rhinosinusitis; (2) recommend analgesics, topical intranasal steroids, and/or nasal saline irrigation) for symptomatic relief of ABRS; and (3) obtain testing for allergy and immune function in evaluating a patient with CRS or recurrent ARS. The update group made recommendations that clinicians (1) should not obtain radiographic imaging for patients who meet diagnostic criteria for ARS, unless a complication or alternative diagnosis is suspected, and (2) should not prescribe topical or systemic antifungal therapy for patients with CRS., (© American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation 2015.)