Comparison between subjective and objective methods to evaluate patients submitted to nasal functional surgeries
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23925/1984-4840.2019v21i3a4Keywords:
nasal obstruction, nasal surgical procedures, Inspiratory Peak Flow, visual analog scaleAbstract
Introduction: Septoplasty and turbinectomy are the most common functional nasal surgeries performed by otolaryngologists. Objective and subjective methods can be used to evaluate the results obtained. Objective: To compare 3 subjective methods and one objective method of evaluation of nasal obstruction in patients submitted to functional nose surgeries and to analyze the efficiency of these surgeries in short- (30 and 45 days) and long-term (6 months) postoperative surgeries. Methods: Thirty patients submitted to functional nose surgeries were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively at short term — between 30 and 45 days — and long term — 6 months —, through the Peak Flow objective method and through 3 subjective scales: Analog Visual Scale (VAS), Nasal Index Score (NIS) and the NOSE Scale. Results: All methods showed significant efficacy of surgery in patients with nasal obstruction in the early and late postoperative period. Peak Flow showed an increase of 65% in the inspiratory flow. The NOSE, NIS and VAS scales also showed significant improvement on nasal obstruction. Comparing results of the NOSE, NIS and VAS scales to Peak Flow, there was no significant difference between preoperative and early and late postoperative (p≥0.05). Conclusion: There is a strong relation between the objective Peak Flow and the subjective methods NOSE, NIS and EVA; any one of them can be used on the evaluation of nasal obstruction.Downloads
Metrics
References
Scheithauer MO. Surgery of the turbinates and “empty nose” syndrome. GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;9:1-28. doi: http://doi.org/10.3205/cto000067
Starling-Schwantz R, Peak HL, Salome CM, Toelle BG, Ng KW, Marks GB et al. Repeatability of peak nasal inspiratory flow measurements and utility of assessing the severity of rhinitis. Allergy. 2005;60(6):795-800. doi: http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1398-9995.2005.00779.x
Hol MKS, Huizing EH. Treatment of inferior turbinate pathology: a review and critical evaluation of the different techniques. Rhinology. 2000;38(4):157-66.
Siméon R, Soufflet B, Souchal Delacour I. Coblation turbinate reduction in childhood allergic rhinitis. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2010;127(2):77‑82. doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.anorl.2010.04.004
Bandos RD, Mello VRD, Ferreira MDS, Rossato M, Anselmo-Lima WT. Clinical and ultrastructural study after partial inferior turbinectomy. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2006;72(5):609-16. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1808-8694(15)31016-8
Konstantinidis I, Triaridis S, Triaridis A, Karagiannidis K, Kontzoglou G. Long term results following nasal septal surgery: focus on patients’ satisfaction. Auris Nasus Larynx. 2005;32(4):369-74. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anl.2005.05.011
Gandomi B, Bayat A, Kazemei T. Outcomes of septoplasty in young adults: the Nasal Obstruction Septoplasty Effectiveness study. Am J Otolaryngol. 2010;31(3):189‑92. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjoto.2009.02.023
Jessen M, Malm L. Definition, prevalence and development of nasal obstruction. Allergy. 1997;52(40 Supl.):3-6. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1398-9995.1997.tb04876.x
Branco A, Ferrari GF, Weber SA. Alterações orofaciais em doenças alérgicas de vias aéreas. Rev Paul Pediatr. 2007;25(3):266-70. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-05822007000300012
Rodrigues MM, Dibbern RS, Oliveira LFD, Marques MDO, Bella MF, Paula Junior FA, et al. Comparison between turbinoplasty and endoscopic turbinectomy: Efficacy and clinical parameters. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2011;15(4):426-30. doi: http://dx.doi.org/S1809-48722011000400004
Teixeira RUF, Zappelini CEM, Oliveira LG, Basile LCG, Costa EAD. Peak flow inspiratory nasal and analogical visual scale’s correlation, pre and pos nasal vasoconstrictive nasal usage. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2011;15(2):156-62. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1809-48722011000200006
Mello Júnior JF. Diretrizes Brasileiras de Rinossinusite. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2008;74(2 Supl. 0):6-59. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0034-72992008000700002
Solé D, Mello Júnior JF, Weckx LLM, Rosário Filho NA. II Consenso Brasileiro sobre rinites 2006. Rev Bras Alerg Imunopatol. 2006;29(1):32-54.
Bousquet J, Khaltaev N, Cruz AA, Denburg J, Fokkens WJ, Togias A, et al. Allergic Rhinitis and its Impact on Asthma (ARIA) 2008 update (in collaboration with the World Health Organization GA (2 LEN and AllerGen). Allergy. 2008;63(Supl. 86):8-160. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1398-9995.2007.01620.x
Corey JP, Houser SM, Ng BA. Nasal congestion: a review of its etiology, evaluation, and treatment. Ear Nose Throat J. 2000;79(9):690-702. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/014556130007900908
Priftis KN, Papadimitriou N, Anthracopoulos MB. Should we perform objective assessment of nasal obstruction in children with chronic rhinitis? J Pediatr. 2012;88(5):374-6. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2223/JPED.2235
Costa GGO, Ctenas BB, Takahashi DY, Mion O, Mello Júnior JF, Butugan O. Comparação entre a rinometria acústica, “Peak Flow” nasal inspiratório e sua correlação com sintomas e sinais clínicos de rinite. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2005;9(3):203-11.
Joseph J. Re: the effects of disclosure of sequential rhinomanometry scores opost‐septoplasty subject scores of nasal obstruction: a randomised controlled trial. Clin Otolaryngol. 2012;37(5):422. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/coa.12013
Mendes AIS, Wandalsen GF, Solé D. Objective and subjective assessments of nasal obstruction in children and adolescents with allergic rhinitis. J Pediatr. 2012;88(5):389-95. doi: https://doi.org/10.2223/JPED.2213
Roithmann R. Avaliação da função respiratória nasal. In: Lopes FO, Campos CAH, editores. Tratado de otorrinolaringologia. São Paulo: Roca; 2003. p. 640-54.
Creticos P, Fireman P, Settipane G, Bernstein D, Casale T, Schwartz H. Intranasal budesonide aqueous pump spray (Rhinocort Aqua) for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Rhinocort Aqua Study Group. Allergy Asthma Proc. 1998;19(5):285-94. doi: https://doi.org/10.2500/108854198778557692
Stewart MG, Smith TL, Weaver EM, Witsell DL, Yueh B, Hannley MT, et al. After nasal septoplasty: results from the Nasal Obstruction Septoplasty effectiveness (NOSE) study. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;130(3):283-90. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2003.12.004
Cavaliere M, Mottola G, Iemma M. Comparison of the effectiveness and safety of radiofrequency turbinoplasty and traditional surgical technique in treatment of inferior turbinate hypertrophy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005;133(6):972-8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2005.08.006
Sapçi T, Sahin B, Karavus A, Akbulut UG. Comparison of the effects of radiofrequency tissue ablation, CO2 laser ablation, and partial turbinectomy applications on nasal mucociliary functions. Laryngoscope. 2003;113(3):514-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/00005537-200303000-00022
Lund VJ, Scadding GK. Objective assessment of endoscopic sinus surgery in the management of chronic rhinosinusitis: an update. J Laryngol Otol. 1994;108(9):749-53. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022215100128014
Marais J, Murray JA, Marshall I, Douglas N, Martin S. Minimal cross-sectional areas, nasal Peak Flow and patients’ satisfaction in septoplasty and inferior turbinectomy. Rhinology. 1994;32(3):145-7.
Cook JA, McCombe AW, Jones AS. Laser treatment of rhinitis: one year follow-up. Clin Otolaryngol. 1993;18(3):209-11. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2273.1993.tb00832.x
Fairley JW, Durham LH, Ell SR. Correlation of subjective sensation of nasal patency with nasal Peak Flow rate. Clin Otolaringol. 1993;18(1):19-22. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2273.1993.tb00803.x
Wilson AM, Dempsey OJ, Sims EJ, Lipworth BJ. Subjective and objective markers of treatment response in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2000;85(2):111-4. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1081-1206(10)62449-0
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2019 Revista da Faculdade de Ciências Médicas de Sorocaba
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Os autores no momento da submissão transferem os direitos autorais, assim, os manuscritos publicados passam a ser propriedade da revista.
O conteúdo do periódico está licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons 4.0, esta licença permite o livre acesso imediato ao trabalho e que qualquer usuário leia, baixe, copie, distribua, imprima, pesquise ou vincule aos textos completos dos artigos, rastreando-os para indexação, passá-los como dados para o software, ou usá-los para qualquer outra finalidade legal.
Este obra está licenciada com uma Licença 