Nathalia Velasquez1, Andrew Thamboo1, Al-Rahim R Habib2, Zhenxiao Huang3, Jayakar V Nayak1. 1. Division of Rhinology, Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA. 2. Sydney Medical Program, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 3. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Beijing Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Empty nose syndrome (ENS) is considered an acquired condition that remains difficult to diagnose objectively. Defining specific symptoms that can be reliably associated with this disorder would be essential to identifying possible ENS patients. We sought to validate an ENS-specific, 6-item questionnaire as an adjunct to the standard Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 22 (SNOT-22) questionnaire to discriminate patients suspected of having ENS. METHODS: The Empty Nose Syndrome 6-item Questionnaire (ENS6Q) paired 6 common ENS symptoms (nasal suffocation, nasal burning, nasal openness, crusting, dryness, and impaired air sensation through nasal cavities) with testing on 75 patients divided in 3 patient cohorts: ENS; chronic rhinosinusitis without polyposis; and healthy controls. Participants answered 2 rounds of both the SNOT-22 questionnaire and ENS6Q within 48 hours of each other. No changes in treatments occurred in the test interval between questionnaires. Internal consistency, test-retest reliability, validity, and area under the curve were assessed to differentiate between patient cohorts using the 2 instruments. RESULTS: We found high internal consistency for ENS6Q and SNOT-22 questionnaire at 0.93 (95% CI, 0.90-0.95) and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.94-0.96), respectively. The test-retest reliability between timepoints for ENS6Q testing was 0.969. The ENS6Q statistically significantly discriminated between ENS and control patients and between ENS and chronic rhinosinusitis without polyposis (CRSsNP) patients, without significant differences between CRSsNP and controls. The area-under-the-curve (AUC) threshold score comparison further supported the ability of the ENS6Q to differentiate ENS from CRSsNP patients. CONCLUSION: The ENS6Q is the first validated, specific, adjunct questionnaire to the SNOT-22 to more reliably identify patients suspected of developing ENS.
BACKGROUND: Empty nose syndrome (ENS) is considered an acquired condition that remains difficult to diagnose objectively. Defining specific symptoms that can be reliably associated with this disorder would be essential to identifying possible ENS patients. We sought to validate an ENS-specific, 6-item questionnaire as an adjunct to the standard Sino-Nasal Outcome Test 22 (SNOT-22) questionnaire to discriminate patients suspected of having ENS. METHODS: The Empty Nose Syndrome 6-item Questionnaire (ENS6Q) paired 6 common ENS symptoms (nasal suffocation, nasal burning, nasal openness, crusting, dryness, and impaired air sensation through nasal cavities) with testing on 75 patients divided in 3 patient cohorts: ENS; chronic rhinosinusitis without polyposis; and healthy controls. Participants answered 2 rounds of both the SNOT-22 questionnaire and ENS6Q within 48 hours of each other. No changes in treatments occurred in the test interval between questionnaires. Internal consistency, test-retest reliability, validity, and area under the curve were assessed to differentiate between patient cohorts using the 2 instruments. RESULTS: We found high internal consistency for ENS6Q and SNOT-22 questionnaire at 0.93 (95% CI, 0.90-0.95) and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.94-0.96), respectively. The test-retest reliability between timepoints for ENS6Q testing was 0.969. The ENS6Q statistically significantly discriminated between ENS and control patients and between ENS and chronic rhinosinusitis without polyposis (CRSsNP) patients, without significant differences between CRSsNP and controls. The area-under-the-curve (AUC) threshold score comparison further supported the ability of the ENS6Q to differentiate ENS from CRSsNP patients. CONCLUSION: The ENS6Q is the first validated, specific, adjunct questionnaire to the SNOT-22 to more reliably identify patients suspected of developing ENS.
Authors: Guillermo Maza; Chengyu Li; Jillian P Krebs; Bradley A Otto; Alexander A Farag; Ricardo L Carrau; Kai Zhao Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2018-11-29 Impact factor: 3.858
Authors: Chengyu Li; Alexander A Farag; James Leach; Bhakthi Deshpande; Adam Jacobowitz; Kanghyun Kim; Bradley A Otto; Kai Zhao Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2017-03-09 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Chengyu Li; Alexander A Farag; Guillermo Maza; Sam McGhee; Michael A Ciccone; Bhakthi Deshpande; Edmund A Pribitkin; Bradley A Otto; Kai Zhao Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2017-11-22 Impact factor: 3.858
Authors: Sarah K Wise; Sandra Y Lin; Elina Toskala; Richard R Orlandi; Cezmi A Akdis; Jeremiah A Alt; Antoine Azar; Fuad M Baroody; Claus Bachert; G Walter Canonica; Thomas Chacko; Cemal Cingi; Giorgio Ciprandi; Jacquelynne Corey; Linda S Cox; Peter Socrates Creticos; Adnan Custovic; Cecelia Damask; Adam DeConde; John M DelGaudio; Charles S Ebert; Jean Anderson Eloy; Carrie E Flanagan; Wytske J Fokkens; Christine Franzese; Jan Gosepath; Ashleigh Halderman; Robert G Hamilton; Hans Jürgen Hoffman; Jens M Hohlfeld; Steven M Houser; Peter H Hwang; Cristoforo Incorvaia; Deborah Jarvis; Ayesha N Khalid; Maritta Kilpeläinen; Todd T Kingdom; Helene Krouse; Desiree Larenas-Linnemann; Adrienne M Laury; Stella E Lee; Joshua M Levy; Amber U Luong; Bradley F Marple; Edward D McCoul; K Christopher McMains; Erik Melén; James W Mims; Gianna Moscato; Joaquim Mullol; Harold S Nelson; Monica Patadia; Ruby Pawankar; Oliver Pfaar; Michael P Platt; William Reisacher; Carmen Rondón; Luke Rudmik; Matthew Ryan; Joaquin Sastre; Rodney J Schlosser; Russell A Settipane; Hemant P Sharma; Aziz Sheikh; Timothy L Smith; Pongsakorn Tantilipikorn; Jody R Tversky; Maria C Veling; De Yun Wang; Marit Westman; Magnus Wickman; Mark Zacharek Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 3.858
Authors: Jennifer Malik; Chengyu Li; Guillermo Maza; Alexander A Farag; Jillian P Krebs; Sam McGhee; Gabriela Zappitelli; Bhakthi Deshpande; Bradley A Otto; Kai Zhao Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2019-05-11 Impact factor: 3.858
Authors: Lauren F Tracy; Saikat Basu; Parth V Shah; Dennis O Frank-Ito; Snigdha Das; Adam M Zanation; Julia S Kimbell Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2019-03-12 Impact factor: 3.858
Authors: Jennifer Malik; Andrew Thamboo; Sachi Dholakia; Nicole A Borchard; Sam McGhee; Chengyu Li; Kai Zhao; Jayakar V Nayak Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2020-01-17 Impact factor: 3.858
Authors: Jennifer Malik; Sachi Dholakia; Barak M Spector; Angela Yang; Dayoung Kim; Nicole A Borchard; Andrew Thamboo; Kai Zhao; Jayakar V Nayak Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2020-11-29 Impact factor: 3.858