Search

Background: The correlation between objective and subjective nasal obstruction is poor, and dissatisfaction rates after surgery for nasal obstruction are high. Accordingly, novel assessment techniques may be required. This survey aimed to determine patient experience and preferences for the measurement of nasal obstruction. Method: Prospective survey of rhinology patients. Results: Of 72 questionnaires distributed, 60 were completed (response rate of 83 per cent). Obstruction duration (more than one year) (χ2 = 13.5, p = 0.00024), but not obstruction severity, affected willingness to spend more time being assessed. Questionnaires (48 per cent) and nasal inspiratory peak flow measurement (53 per cent) are the most commonly used assessment techniques. Forty-nine per cent of participants found their assessment unhelpful in understanding their obstruction. Eighty-two per cent agreed or strongly agreed that a visual and numerical aid would help them understand their blockage. Conclusion: Many patients are dissatisfied with current assessment techniques; a novel device with visual or numerical results may help. Obstruction duration determines willingness to undergo longer assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]