1. Comparison of side effects and patient perceptions towards Rapid Rhino and Merocel packs in epistaxis.
- Author
-
Mettias B, Karia CT, Irvine E, and Conboy P
- Subjects
- Humans, Female, Prospective Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Aged, Adult, Tampons, Surgical, Hemostatics therapeutic use, Treatment Outcome, Polyurethanes, Patient Satisfaction, Epistaxis therapy, Formaldehyde adverse effects, Formaldehyde therapeutic use, Polyvinyl Alcohol therapeutic use, Polyvinyl Alcohol adverse effects
- Abstract
Objective: Non-dissolvable nasal packs (Rapid Rhino and Merocel) are widely used in secondary healthcare centres for the control of epistaxis, with some side effects., Methods: A prospective, observational cohort study was conducted of adults who required Rapid Rhino or Merocel packing for acute epistaxis management in a large healthcare centre between March 2020 and 2021. A validated modified version of the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test was used., Results: A total of 80 adults requiring non-dissolvable packs were recruited. Seventy per cent of patients had Rapid Rhino packs inserted. Embarrassment was greater in patients who used Rapid Rhino than Merocel. Merocel packs had a significantly higher mean pain score on removal compared to Rapid Rhino. There was no correlation between rebleed rate and type of nasal pack used., Conclusion: Non-dissolvable Rapid Rhino and Merocel nasal packs have similar efficacy in controlling epistaxis. Rapid Rhino packs are more embarrassing for patients in comparison to Merocel packs, but are less painful to remove.
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF