Jesse Tapiala1, Antti Hyvärinen2, Sanna Toppila-Salmi3, Eero Suihko4, Elina Penttilä1. 1. Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Kuopio University Hospital and University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland. 2. Department of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland. 3. Skin and Allergy Hospital, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. 4. Joensuun Uusi Apteekki and University of Eastern, Joensuu, Finland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To explore the opinions, the usage and the patient education given on nasal saline irrigation by physicians and pharmaceutical personnel working in Finland. DESIGN: An internet-based survey with predetermined, multiple-choice answers. SETTING: Primary care centres, occupational health centres and private care centres in Eastern Finland as well as pharmacies in Finland. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Healthcare professionals views, practice and general knowledge of nasal irrigation for sinonasal symptoms and conditions. RESULTS: We received 595 completed surveys (110 physicians, 485 pharmacists). The majority of the respondents recommended nasal saline irrigation for their patients either as a symptomatic treatment (98.0%) or to treat a specific condition (97.5%) such as acute rhinosinusitis, chronic rhinosinusitis and allergic rhinitis. Nasal saline irrigation was also often recommended as a prophylaxis for airway-infections (71.9%) and to enhance the health of the nasal mucosa (58.2%). In general, the possible adverse effects were recognised poorly by both professions. There was a clear difference between the two professions, as physicians were more conservative in recommending nasal saline irrigation and recognised possible adverse effects, such as epistaxis, pain, and dryness of the nose, better (75% vs. 59%, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Nasal saline irrigation seems to be a popular treatment recommended by many health care professionals in Finland. Physicians and pharmaceutical personnel had variable opinions on the indications, utility and risks of nasal saline irrigation. There are also clear differences between physicians and pharmaceutical personnel's practices. There is a need to better educate professionals about nasal saline irrigation and to further study whether nasal saline irrigation is efficient and safe option for the different common sinonasal conditions.KEY POINTSLittle information is available on how physicians and pharmacists recommend nasal saline irrigation as a symptomatic treatment.Physicians and pharmacists seem to have variable opinions about the indications, utility and safety of nasal saline irrigation.The patient education given is in general very heterogenous.Both professions require more education to ensure that the usage remains as safe as possible for the patient.
OBJECTIVES: To explore the opinions, the usage and the patient education given on nasal saline irrigation by physicians and pharmaceutical personnel working in Finland. DESIGN: An internet-based survey with predetermined, multiple-choice answers. SETTING: Primary care centres, occupational health centres and private care centres in Eastern Finland as well as pharmacies in Finland. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Healthcare professionals views, practice and general knowledge of nasal irrigation for sinonasal symptoms and conditions. RESULTS: We received 595 completed surveys (110 physicians, 485 pharmacists). The majority of the respondents recommended nasal saline irrigation for their patients either as a symptomatic treatment (98.0%) or to treat a specific condition (97.5%) such as acute rhinosinusitis, chronic rhinosinusitis and allergic rhinitis. Nasal saline irrigation was also often recommended as a prophylaxis for airway-infections (71.9%) and to enhance the health of the nasal mucosa (58.2%). In general, the possible adverse effects were recognised poorly by both professions. There was a clear difference between the two professions, as physicians were more conservative in recommending nasal saline irrigation and recognised possible adverse effects, such as epistaxis, pain, and dryness of the nose, better (75% vs. 59%, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Nasal saline irrigation seems to be a popular treatment recommended by many health care professionals in Finland. Physicians and pharmaceutical personnel had variable opinions on the indications, utility and risks of nasal saline irrigation. There are also clear differences between physicians and pharmaceutical personnel's practices. There is a need to better educate professionals about nasal saline irrigation and to further study whether nasal saline irrigation is efficient and safe option for the different common sinonasal conditions.KEY POINTSLittle information is available on how physicians and pharmacists recommend nasal saline irrigation as a symptomatic treatment.Physicians and pharmacists seem to have variable opinions about the indications, utility and safety of nasal saline irrigation.The patient education given is in general very heterogenous.Both professions require more education to ensure that the usage remains as safe as possible for the patient.
Authors: D Hastan; W J Fokkens; C Bachert; R B Newson; J Bislimovska; A Bockelbrink; P J Bousquet; G Brozek; A Bruno; S E Dahlén; B Forsberg; M Gunnbjörnsdóttir; L Kasper; U Krämer; M L Kowalski; B Lange; B Lundbäck; E Salagean; A Todo-Bom; P Tomassen; E Toskala; C M van Drunen; J Bousquet; T Zuberbier; D Jarvis; P Burney Journal: Allergy Date: 2011-05-24 Impact factor: 13.146
Authors: Kian Fan Chung; Sally E Wenzel; Jan L Brozek; Andrew Bush; Mario Castro; Peter J Sterk; Ian M Adcock; Eric D Bateman; Elisabeth H Bel; Eugene R Bleecker; Louis-Philippe Boulet; Christopher Brightling; Pascal Chanez; Sven-Erik Dahlen; Ratko Djukanovic; Urs Frey; Mina Gaga; Peter Gibson; Qutayba Hamid; Nizar N Jajour; Thais Mauad; Ronald L Sorkness; W Gerald Teague Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2013-12-12 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Mia Tyrstrup; Alike van der Velden; Sven Engstrom; Geert Goderis; Sigvard Molstad; Theo Verheij; Samuel Coenen; Niels Adriaenssens Journal: Scand J Prim Health Care Date: 2017-03-03 Impact factor: 2.581
Authors: Lee Yee Chong; Karen Head; Claire Hopkins; Carl Philpott; Simon Glew; Glenis Scadding; Martin J Burton; Anne G M Schilder Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2016-04-26
Authors: Laura Trolle Saust; Lars Bjerrum; Volkert Siersma; Magnus Arpi; Malene Plejdrup Hansen Journal: Scand J Prim Health Care Date: 2018-10-08 Impact factor: 2.581