Effectiveness of septoplasty compared to medical management in adults with obstruction associated with a deviated nasal septum: the NAIROS RCT.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Sean Carrie, Tony Fouweather, Tara Homer, James O'Hara, Nikki Rousseau, Leila Rooshenas, Alison Bray, Deborah D Stocken, Laura Ternent, Katherine Rennie, Emma Clark, Nichola Waugh, Alison J Steel, Jemima Dooley, Michael Drinnan, David Hamilton, Kelly Lloyd, Yemi Oluboyede, Caroline Wilson, Quentin Gardiner, Naveed Kara, Sadie Khwaja, Samuel Chee Leong, Sangeeta Maini, Jillian Morrison, Paul Nix, Janet A Wilson, M Dawn Teare
{"title":"Effectiveness of septoplasty compared to medical management in adults with obstruction associated with a deviated nasal septum: the NAIROS RCT.","authors":"Sean Carrie, Tony Fouweather, Tara Homer, James O'Hara, Nikki Rousseau, Leila Rooshenas, Alison Bray, Deborah D Stocken, Laura Ternent, Katherine Rennie, Emma Clark, Nichola Waugh, Alison J Steel, Jemima Dooley, Michael Drinnan, David Hamilton, Kelly Lloyd, Yemi Oluboyede, Caroline Wilson, Quentin Gardiner, Naveed Kara, Sadie Khwaja, Samuel Chee Leong, Sangeeta Maini, Jillian Morrison, Paul Nix, Janet A Wilson, M Dawn Teare","doi":"10.3310/MVFR4028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The indications for septoplasty are practice-based, rather than evidence-based. In addition, internationally accepted guidelines for the management of nasal obstruction associated with nasal septal deviation are lacking.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective was to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of septoplasty, with or without turbinate reduction, compared with medical management, in the management of nasal obstruction associated with a deviated nasal septum.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This was a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing septoplasty, with or without turbinate reduction, with defined medical management; it incorporated a mixed-methods process evaluation and an economic evaluation.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The trial was set in 17 NHS secondary care hospitals in the UK.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A total of 378 eligible participants aged > 18 years were recruited.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>Participants were randomised on a 1: 1 basis and stratified by baseline severity and gender to either (1) septoplasty, with or without turbinate surgery (<i>n</i> = 188) or (2) medical management with intranasal steroid spray and saline spray (<i>n</i> = 190).</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome was the Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items score at 6 months (patient-reported outcome). The secondary outcomes were as follows: patient-reported outcomes - Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation score at 6 and 12 months, Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items subscales at 12 months, Double Ordinal Airway Subjective Scale at 6 and 12 months, the Short Form questionnaire-36 items and costs; objective measurements - peak nasal inspiratory flow and rhinospirometry. The number of adverse events experienced was also recorded. A within-trial economic evaluation from an NHS and Personal Social Services perspective estimated the incremental cost per (1) improvement (of ≥ 9 points) in Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items score, (2) adverse event avoided and (3) quality-adjusted life-year gained at 12 months. An economic model estimated the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained at 24 and 36 months. A mixed-methods process evaluation was undertaken to understand/address recruitment issues and examine the acceptability of trial processes and treatment arms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At the 6-month time point, 307 participants provided primary outcome data (septoplasty, <i>n</i> = 152; medical management, <i>n</i> = 155). An intention-to-treat analysis revealed a greater and more sustained improvement in the primary outcome measure in the surgical arm. The 6-month mean Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items scores were -20.0 points lower (better) for participants randomised to septoplasty than for those randomised to medical management [the score for the septoplasty arm was 19.9 and the score for the medical management arm was 39.5 (95% confidence interval -23.6 to -16.4; <i>p</i> < 0.0001)]. This was confirmed by sensitivity analyses and through the analysis of secondary outcomes. Outcomes were statistically significantly related to baseline severity, but not to gender or turbinate reduction. In the surgical and medical management arms, 132 and 95 adverse events occurred, respectively; 14 serious adverse events occurred in the surgical arm and nine in the medical management arm. On average, septoplasty was more costly and more effective in improving Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items scores and quality-adjusted life-years than medical management, but incurred a larger number of adverse events. Septoplasty had a 15% probability of being considered cost-effective at 12 months at a £20,000 willingness-to-pay threshold for an additional quality-adjusted life-year. This probability increased to 99% and 100% at 24 and 36 months, respectively.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>COVID-19 had an impact on participant-facing data collection from March 2020.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Septoplasty, with or without turbinate reduction, is more effective than medical management with a nasal steroid and saline spray. Baseline severity predicts the degree of improvement in symptoms. Septoplasty has a low probability of cost-effectiveness at 12 months, but may be considered cost-effective at 24 months. Future work should focus on developing a septoplasty patient decision aid.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This trial is registered as ISRCTN16168569 and EudraCT 2017-000893-12.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 14/226/07) and is published in full in <i>Health Technology Assessment</i>; Vol. 28, No. 10. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.</p>","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":"28 10","pages":"1-213"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11017631/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health technology assessment","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/MVFR4028","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The indications for septoplasty are practice-based, rather than evidence-based. In addition, internationally accepted guidelines for the management of nasal obstruction associated with nasal septal deviation are lacking.

Objective: The objective was to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of septoplasty, with or without turbinate reduction, compared with medical management, in the management of nasal obstruction associated with a deviated nasal septum.

Design: This was a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing septoplasty, with or without turbinate reduction, with defined medical management; it incorporated a mixed-methods process evaluation and an economic evaluation.

Setting: The trial was set in 17 NHS secondary care hospitals in the UK.

Participants: A total of 378 eligible participants aged > 18 years were recruited.

Interventions: Participants were randomised on a 1: 1 basis and stratified by baseline severity and gender to either (1) septoplasty, with or without turbinate surgery (n = 188) or (2) medical management with intranasal steroid spray and saline spray (n = 190).

Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items score at 6 months (patient-reported outcome). The secondary outcomes were as follows: patient-reported outcomes - Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation score at 6 and 12 months, Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items subscales at 12 months, Double Ordinal Airway Subjective Scale at 6 and 12 months, the Short Form questionnaire-36 items and costs; objective measurements - peak nasal inspiratory flow and rhinospirometry. The number of adverse events experienced was also recorded. A within-trial economic evaluation from an NHS and Personal Social Services perspective estimated the incremental cost per (1) improvement (of ≥ 9 points) in Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items score, (2) adverse event avoided and (3) quality-adjusted life-year gained at 12 months. An economic model estimated the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained at 24 and 36 months. A mixed-methods process evaluation was undertaken to understand/address recruitment issues and examine the acceptability of trial processes and treatment arms.

Results: At the 6-month time point, 307 participants provided primary outcome data (septoplasty, n = 152; medical management, n = 155). An intention-to-treat analysis revealed a greater and more sustained improvement in the primary outcome measure in the surgical arm. The 6-month mean Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items scores were -20.0 points lower (better) for participants randomised to septoplasty than for those randomised to medical management [the score for the septoplasty arm was 19.9 and the score for the medical management arm was 39.5 (95% confidence interval -23.6 to -16.4; p < 0.0001)]. This was confirmed by sensitivity analyses and through the analysis of secondary outcomes. Outcomes were statistically significantly related to baseline severity, but not to gender or turbinate reduction. In the surgical and medical management arms, 132 and 95 adverse events occurred, respectively; 14 serious adverse events occurred in the surgical arm and nine in the medical management arm. On average, septoplasty was more costly and more effective in improving Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items scores and quality-adjusted life-years than medical management, but incurred a larger number of adverse events. Septoplasty had a 15% probability of being considered cost-effective at 12 months at a £20,000 willingness-to-pay threshold for an additional quality-adjusted life-year. This probability increased to 99% and 100% at 24 and 36 months, respectively.

Limitations: COVID-19 had an impact on participant-facing data collection from March 2020.

Conclusions: Septoplasty, with or without turbinate reduction, is more effective than medical management with a nasal steroid and saline spray. Baseline severity predicts the degree of improvement in symptoms. Septoplasty has a low probability of cost-effectiveness at 12 months, but may be considered cost-effective at 24 months. Future work should focus on developing a septoplasty patient decision aid.

Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN16168569 and EudraCT 2017-000893-12.

Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 14/226/07) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 10. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

与药物治疗相比,鼻中隔成形术对成人鼻中隔偏曲阻塞患者的疗效:NAIROS RCT。
背景:鼻中隔成形术的适应症以实践为基础,而非以证据为依据。此外,对于鼻中隔偏曲引起的鼻腔阻塞,目前还缺乏国际公认的治疗指南:目的:在治疗与鼻中隔偏曲相关的鼻阻塞时,确定鼻中隔成形术(无论是否进行鼻甲缩小术)与药物治疗相比的临床效果和成本效益:这是一项多中心随机对照试验,比较了鼻中隔成形术(带或不带鼻甲缩小术)与明确的药物治疗;其中包括一项混合方法过程评估和一项经济评估:试验在英国 17 家国家医疗服务系统二级护理医院进行:共招募了378名符合条件的参与者,年龄在18岁以上:干预措施:参与者按1:1的比例随机分配,并根据基线严重程度和性别进行分层:(1)鼻中隔成形术,包括或不包括鼻甲手术(n = 188);或(2)鼻内类固醇喷剂和生理盐水喷剂的药物治疗(n = 190):主要结果为 6 个月时的中鼻结果测试-22 项评分(患者报告结果)。次要结果如下:患者报告结果--6 个月和 12 个月时的鼻阻塞症状评估得分、12 个月时的中鼻结果测试--22 个项目的分量表、6 个月和 12 个月时的气道主观双标准量表、简短问卷--36 个项目和费用;客观测量--鼻吸气流量峰值和鼻气压测定。此外,还记录了发生不良事件的次数。从英国国家医疗服务体系和个人社会服务的角度进行了试验内经济评估,估算了12个月内每(1)改善(≥9分)中鼻成果测试-22项得分、(2)避免不良事件和(3)获得质量调整生命年的增量成本。经济模型估算了 24 个月和 36 个月时每个质量调整生命年的增量成本。为了解/解决招募问题并考察试验过程和治疗臂的可接受性,进行了混合方法过程评估:在 6 个月的时间点,307 名参与者提供了主要结果数据(鼻中隔成形术,n = 152;医疗管理,n = 155)。意向治疗分析显示,手术治疗组的主要疗效改善更大、更持久。与随机接受内科治疗的患者相比,随机接受鼻中隔成形术治疗的患者的 6 个月平均中鼻结果测试-22 项评分降低了 20.0 分(更好)[鼻中隔成形术治疗组的评分为 19.9 分,内科治疗组的评分为 39.5 分(95% 置信区间为-23.6 到-16.4;P < 0.0001)]。敏感性分析和次要结果分析证实了这一点。结果与基线严重程度有明显统计学关系,但与性别或鼻甲缩小程度无关。手术治疗组和药物治疗组分别发生了 132 例和 95 例不良事件;手术治疗组发生了 14 例严重不良事件,药物治疗组发生了 9 例严重不良事件。平均而言,与药物治疗相比,鼻中隔成形术的成本更高,在改善 "中鼻结果测试-22 "项目评分和质量调整生命年方面更有效,但发生的不良事件更多。以增加质量调整寿命年数的 20,000 英镑支付意愿为阈值,12 个月后,鼻中隔成形术被认为具有成本效益的概率为 15%。这一概率在24个月和36个月时分别增至99%和100%:COVID-19影响了2020年3月起面向参与者的数据收集:结论:鼻中隔成形术(无论是否切除鼻甲)比使用鼻腔类固醇和生理盐水喷雾剂的药物治疗更有效。基线严重程度可预测症状的改善程度。鼻中隔成形术在 12 个月时的成本效益概率较低,但在 24 个月时可能被认为具有成本效益。今后的工作重点应放在开发鼻中隔成形术患者决策辅助工具上:本试验注册号为 ISRCTN16168569 和 EudraCT 2017-000893-12:该奖项由国家健康与护理研究所(NIHR)健康技术评估计划资助(NIHR奖项编号:14/226/07),全文发表于《健康技术评估》;第28卷,第10期。如需了解更多奖项信息,请参阅 NIHR Funding and Awards 网站。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Health technology assessment
Health technology assessment 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
94
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Technology Assessment (HTA) publishes research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信