The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The need for an objective measure in septorhinoplasty surgery: are we any closer to finding an answer?
Abstract
Objectives To assess the reliability of nasal inspiratory peak flow (NIPF) in providing a clinically accurate objective measure following functional septorhinoplasty by comparing it to the validated disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaire, SNOT-22. Studies so far have demonstrated poor correlation between bilateral NIPF and symptom-specific nasal questionnaires following septorhinoplasty. Design To perform a prospective comparative analysis between NIPF and the validated disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaire SNOT-22 and to determine whether a correlation exists following septorhinoplasty surgery. Setting The Royal National Throat Nose and Ear Hospital, London. Participants A total of 122 patients (78 males, 44 females; mean age 33.5 ± 12.2 years) were recruited from the senior authors rhinology clinic and underwent functional septorhinoplasty surgery. Main outcome measures Preoperative and postoperative nasal inspiratory peak flow (NIPF) measurements were performed in addition to the completion of three subjective quality-of-life and symptom assessment tool questionnaires; Sinonasal Outcome Test 22 (SNOT-22), Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS: 0-10). Results The mean preoperative NIPF was 88.2 L/min, and the postoperative value was 101.6 L/min and showed a significant improvement following surgery (P = 0.0064). The mean total SNOT-22 score improved significantly from 48.6 to 26.6 (P Conclusion We have demonstrated that…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
PNIF relationship seems to improve when compared with validated questionnaires such as SNOT-22 and NOSE.
“although it seems to improve when compared with validated questionnaires such as the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) and NOSE [65,68,70-73].”
From Position Paper on Nasal Obstruction: Evaluation and Treatment (2018) · cites this paper as [73]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 29
- 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2009.01995.x · DOI
- 10.1002/lary.23615 · DOI
- Hopkins C., 2009, Patient reported outcome measures in rhinology, Rhinology, 47, 10
- 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2006.01155.x · DOI
- 10.1046/j.1365-2273.2003.00663.x · DOI
- 10.1007/s00405-012-1931-9 · DOI
- 10.1001/archoto.2010.1 · DOI
- 10.1007/s00405-011-1916-0 · DOI
- 10.2500/ajra.2011.25.3650 · DOI
- Takhar A., 2014, Validation of the sino‐nasal outcome test‐23 in septorhinoplasty surgery, Rhinology, 52, 320
- Klossek J.M., 2009, PNIF measurement in a healthy French population. A prospective study about 234 patients, Rhinology, 47, 389
- Ottaviano G., 2008, Does peak nasal inspiratory flow relate to peak expiratory flow?, Rhinology, 46, 200
- Ottaviano G., 2006, Peak nasal inspiratory flow; normal range in adult population, Rhinology, 44, 32
- 10.4193/Rhino10.097 · DOI
- 10.1179/jmt.2008.16.4.82E · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1001/archfacial.2010.57 · DOI
- 10.1055/s-0030-1262316 · DOI
- 10.1097/SCS.0b013e318280263a · DOI
- 10.1007/s00405-012-2102-8 · DOI
- Marais J., 1994, Minimal cross‐sectional areas, nasal peak flow and patients' satisfaction in septoplasty and inferior turbinectomy, Rhinology, 32, 145
- 10.2500/ajra.2014.28.4080 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-2273.1993.tb00832.x · DOI
- Poirrier A.L., 2014, External nasal valve collapse: validation of novel outcome measurement tool, Rhinology, 52, 127, 10.4193/Rhino13.051 · DOI
- 10.1097/MLG.0b013e318161e56b · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2005.00779.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.4193/Rhin13.181 · DOI
- 10.4193/Rhin12.071 · DOI
- 10.1097/MOO.0b013e32833b51e6 · DOI
- 10.1513/pats.201005-034RN · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Position Paper on Nasal Obstruction: Evaluation and Treatment
SEAIC Rhinoconjunctivitis Committee & SEORL Rhinology, A., Valero, A., Navarro, A., del Cuvillo, A., Alobid, I., Benito, Jr., Colás, C., de los Santos, G., Fernández Liesa, R., García-Lliberós, A., et al. (2018) · Journal of Investigational Allergology and Clinical Immunology · doi:10.18176/jiaci.0232 · Cited by 76
Sharma, S., Wormald, J. C. R., Fishman, J. M., Andrews, P., & Kotecha, B. T. (2019) · The Journal of Laryngology & Otology · doi:10.1017/s0022215119000240 · Cited by 16
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Andrews, P. J., Choudhury, N., Takhar, A., Poirrier, A. L., Jacques, T., & Randhawa, P. S.
- Affiliations
- Royal National Throat Nose and Ear Hospital (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Randhawa, P.S.
- Venue
- Clinical Otolaryngology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-11-18
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 698-703
- ISSN
- 0307-7772 (ISSN-L)
- 1749-4478
- 1749-4486
- OpenAlex
- W1845795207
- Cited by
- 56
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 5.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Clinical Otolaryngology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ORBi (University of Liège) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Nasal Surgery and Airway Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Otorhinolaryngology › Sinusitis and nasal conditions
- Health Sciences › Dentistry › Oral Surgery › Cleft Lip and Palate Research
- Keywords
- septorhinoplasty, SNOT-22, nasal obstruction, quality of life, postoperative outcomes, functional rhinoplasty, NOSE questionnaire, patient-reported outcomes
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Nasal Septum, Postoperative Period, Prospective Studies, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Rhinoplasty, Nasal Obstruction, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
