BACKGROUND: Responsiveness, or sensitivity to clinical change, is important when selecting patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for research and clinical applications. This study compares responsiveness of PROMs used in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) to inform the future development of a highly responsive instrument that accurately portrays CRS patients' symptom experiences. METHODS: Adult CRS patients initiating medical therapy (MT; n = 143) or undergoing endoscopic sinus surgery after failing MT (ESS; n = 123) completed the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22), European Position Statement on Rhinosinusitis (EPOS) visual analog scale (VAS), and 29-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-29) at baseline and 3 months after treatment. Cohen's d and paired t statistics were used to evaluate the responsiveness of each measure. RESULTS: Fifty-two (36.4%) subjects and 42 (34.1%) subjects in the MT and ESS groups, respectively, completed baseline and 3-month questionnaires. Subjects with and without 3-month data were similar with respect to baseline demographics, VAS scores, and SNOT-22 scores (p > 0.05). In MT patients, CRS-specific measures, like VAS (d = -0.58, p < 0.01; t = -1.81, p > 0.05) and SNOT-22 (d = -0.70, p < 0.01; t = -3.29, p < 0.05) scores, were more responsive than PROMIS-29 general health domains (p > 0.05 for Cohen's d). In ESS patients, VAS (d = -1.97; t = -9.63, both p < 0.01) and SNOT-22 (d = -1.56; t = -9.99, both p < 0.01) scores were similarly more responsive, although changes in PROMIS-29 domains of Fatigue (d = -0.82, p = 0.01; t = -4.63, p < 0.01), Sleep Disturbance (d = -0.83; t = -3.77, both p < 0.01), and Pain Intensity (d = -1.0; t = -5.67, both p < 0.01) were significant. All 22 individual SNOT-22 items differed significantly after surgery, whereas only 8 items were consistently responsive after MT. CONCLUSIONS: For both MT and ESS patients, CRS-specific PROMs are more responsive to posttreatment clinical changes than general health measures. Still, the SNOT-22 contains items that likely decrease its overall responsiveness. Our findings also indicate that existing PROMs had a greater response to ESS than MT.
BACKGROUND: Responsiveness, or sensitivity to clinical change, is important when selecting patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for research and clinical applications. This study compares responsiveness of PROMs used in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) to inform the future development of a highly responsive instrument that accurately portrays CRSpatients' symptom experiences. METHODS: Adult CRSpatients initiating medical therapy (MT; n = 143) or undergoing endoscopic sinus surgery after failing MT (ESS; n = 123) completed the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22), European Position Statement on Rhinosinusitis (EPOS) visual analog scale (VAS), and 29-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-29) at baseline and 3 months after treatment. Cohen's d and paired t statistics were used to evaluate the responsiveness of each measure. RESULTS: Fifty-two (36.4%) subjects and 42 (34.1%) subjects in the MT and ESS groups, respectively, completed baseline and 3-month questionnaires. Subjects with and without 3-month data were similar with respect to baseline demographics, VAS scores, and SNOT-22 scores (p > 0.05). In MT patients, CRS-specific measures, like VAS (d = -0.58, p < 0.01; t = -1.81, p > 0.05) and SNOT-22 (d = -0.70, p < 0.01; t = -3.29, p < 0.05) scores, were more responsive than PROMIS-29 general health domains (p > 0.05 for Cohen's d). In ESSpatients, VAS (d = -1.97; t = -9.63, both p < 0.01) and SNOT-22 (d = -1.56; t = -9.99, both p < 0.01) scores were similarly more responsive, although changes in PROMIS-29 domains of Fatigue (d = -0.82, p = 0.01; t = -4.63, p < 0.01), Sleep Disturbance (d = -0.83; t = -3.77, both p < 0.01), and Pain Intensity (d = -1.0; t = -5.67, both p < 0.01) were significant. All 22 individual SNOT-22 items differed significantly after surgery, whereas only 8 items were consistently responsive after MT. CONCLUSIONS: For both MT and ESSpatients, CRS-specific PROMs are more responsive to posttreatment clinical changes than general health measures. Still, the SNOT-22 contains items that likely decrease its overall responsiveness. Our findings also indicate that existing PROMs had a greater response to ESS than MT.
Authors: W J Videler; L Badia; R J Harvey; S Gane; C Georgalas; F W van der Meulen; D J Menger; M T Lehtonen; S K Toppila-Salmi; S I Vento; M Hytönen; P W Hellings; L Kalogjera; V J Lund; G Scadding; J Mullol; W J Fokkens Journal: Allergy Date: 2011-09-02 Impact factor: 13.146
Authors: Wytske J Fokkens; Valerie J Lund; Joachim Mullol; Claus Bachert; Isam Alobid; Fuad Baroody; Noam Cohen; Anders Cervin; Richard Douglas; Philippe Gevaert; Christos Georgalas; Herman Goossens; Richard Harvey; Peter Hellings; Claire Hopkins; Nick Jones; Guy Joos; Livije Kalogjera; Bob Kern; Marek Kowalski; David Price; Herbert Riechelmann; Rodney Schlosser; Brent Senior; Mike Thomas; Elina Toskala; Richard Voegels; De Yun Wang; Peter John Wormald Journal: Rhinology Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 3.681
Authors: Aaron K Remenschneider; Laura D'Amico; Jamie R Litvack; Stacey T Gray; Eric H Holbrook; Richard Gliklich; Ralph Metson Journal: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2014-04-04 Impact factor: 3.497
Authors: Christopher John Staniorski; Caroline P E Price; Ava R Weibman; Kevin C Welch; David B Conley; Stephanie Shintani-Smith; Whitney W Stevens; Anju T Peters; Leslie Grammer; Alcina K Lidder; Robert P Schleimer; Robert C Kern; Bruce K Tan Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2018-01-05 Impact factor: 3.858
Authors: Saied Ghadersohi; Caroline P E Price; Jennifer L Beaumont; Robert C Kern; David B Conley; Kevin C Welch; Alexis M Calice; Elizabeth Stanton; Marisa K VanderMeeden; Sally E Jensen; Anju T Peters; Leslie C Grammer; Whitney W Stevens; Robert P Schleimer; Bruce K Tan Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract Date: 2020-04-30
Authors: Robert Naclerio; Fuad Baroody; Claus Bachert; Benjamin Bleier; Larry Borish; Erica Brittain; Geoffrey Chupp; Anat Fisher; Wytske Fokkens; Philippe Gevaert; David Kennedy; Jean Kim; Tanya M Laidlaw; Jake J Lee; Jay F Piccirillo; Jayant M Pinto; Lauren T Roland; Robert P Schleimer; Rodney J Schlosser; Julie M Schwaninger; Timothy L Smith; Bruce K Tan; Ming Tan; Elina Toskala; Sally Wenzel; Alkis Togias Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract Date: 2020-03-04
Authors: Katherine A Lin; Caroline P E Price; Julia H Huang; Saied Ghadersohi; David Cella; Robert C Kern; David B Conley; Stephanie Shintani-Smith; Kevin C Welch; Bruce K Tan Journal: Int Forum Allergy Rhinol Date: 2021-03-16 Impact factor: 5.426