BACKGROUND: Recent consensus statements on the diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) now require endoscopic or radiographic evidence of paranasal sinus inflammation. The timing of point-of-care (POC) computed tomography (CT) scan in the workup of these patients remains to be elucidated, particularly when endoscopy is negative. The objective of this research was to prospectively evaluate 2 algorithms for the initial management of patients with symptoms of CRS who manifest a normal nasal endoscopic examination. METHODS:A total of 40 such patients were randomized to 1 of 2 pathways: POC-CT at the initial visit followed by medical therapy based upon CT results (pre-CT group; n = 20), or empiric medical therapy (EMT) followed by POC posttreatment CT if symptoms persisted (EMT group; n = 20). RESULTS: The 2 groups were demographically and symptomatically similar with regard to 2003 Task Force major criteria. Otolaryngology follow-up was recommended in 11 of 20 pre-CT patients, all of whom (100%) returned. In contrast, only 10 of 20 EMT patients (50%) followed up as instructed (p < 0.05). Radiographic confirmation of CRS was found in 8 of 20 pre-CT patients, and only 2 of 9 patients after EMT (p = 0.61). EMT patients received more antibiotic prescriptions (relative ratio [RR], 2.50; 95% CI, 1.46-4.27), while pre-CT patients received more CT scans (RR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.37-3.61). Overall prescriptions costs were similar to the EMT group ($253 vs $218; p = 0.37) and the overall number of otolaryngology visits was similar. CONCLUSION: In patients with symptoms of CRS but negative endoscopy, POC at initial presentation results in substantially less unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions and significantly greater compliance with otolaryngology care but does result in a higher utilization of radiographic imaging.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Recent consensus statements on the diagnosis of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) now require endoscopic or radiographic evidence of paranasal sinus inflammation. The timing of point-of-care (POC) computed tomography (CT) scan in the workup of these patients remains to be elucidated, particularly when endoscopy is negative. The objective of this research was to prospectively evaluate 2 algorithms for the initial management of patients with symptoms of CRS who manifest a normal nasal endoscopic examination. METHODS: A total of 40 such patients were randomized to 1 of 2 pathways: POC-CT at the initial visit followed by medical therapy based upon CT results (pre-CT group; n = 20), or empiric medical therapy (EMT) followed by POC posttreatment CT if symptoms persisted (EMT group; n = 20). RESULTS: The 2 groups were demographically and symptomatically similar with regard to 2003 Task Force major criteria. Otolaryngology follow-up was recommended in 11 of 20 pre-CT patients, all of whom (100%) returned. In contrast, only 10 of 20 EMT patients (50%) followed up as instructed (p < 0.05). Radiographic confirmation of CRS was found in 8 of 20 pre-CT patients, and only 2 of 9 patients after EMT (p = 0.61). EMT patients received more antibiotic prescriptions (relative ratio [RR], 2.50; 95% CI, 1.46-4.27), while pre-CT patients received more CT scans (RR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.37-3.61). Overall prescriptions costs were similar to the EMT group ($253 vs $218; p = 0.37) and the overall number of otolaryngology visits was similar. CONCLUSION: In patients with symptoms of CRS but negative endoscopy, POC at initial presentation results in substantially less unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions and significantly greater compliance with otolaryngology care but does result in a higher utilization of radiographic imaging.
Authors: Opeyemi O Daramola; Alcina K Lidder; Ramiza Ramli; Rakesh K Chandra; Stephanie Shintani-Smith; David B Conley; Robert C Kern; Bruce K Tan Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2014-10-24 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Bruce K Tan; Rakesh K Chandra; Jonathan Pollak; Atsushi Kato; David B Conley; Anju T Peters; Leslie C Grammer; Pedro C Avila; Robert C Kern; Walter F Stewart; Robert P Schleimer; Brian S Schwartz Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2013-03-28 Impact factor: 10.793