The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Peak nasal inspiratory flow correlates with quality of life in functional endoscopic sinus surgery
Abstract
Objectives Whilst nasal function and airflow improve subjectively following functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS), a clinically useful and objective tool for quantifying such improvement is lacking. The peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) metre offers convenient and objective measures of nasal patency. However, it has not yet been established whether changes in PNIF after surgery reflect changes in subjective disease burden. In this study we aimed to determine whether changes in PNIF correlate with commonly used subjective symptom and quality of life outcome measures following FESS for chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Design Prospective cohort. Setting Royal National Throat Nose and Ear Hospital. Participants Thirty-seven patients undergoing FESS for CRS, with or without polyps (21 male, mean age 48.8). Main outcome measures PNIF, "SNOT-22", "NOSE" and "VAS" questionnaires were performed before and after surgery. Results In all patients, there was a strong negative correlation between change in PNIF and change in "SNOT-22" score following surgery (Pearson r=-.64, P Conclusions Changes in PNIF after FESS appear to best reflect improvements in quality of life in CRS as measured using the "SNOT-22" questionnaire.
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 [70]
Citations
Cites
Fokkens, W. J., Lund, V. J., Mullol, J., Bachert, C., Alobid, I., Baroody, F., Cohen, N., Cervin, A., Douglas, R., Gevaert, P., et al. (2012) · Rhinology journal · doi:10.4193/rhino12.000 · Cited by 2,387
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 24
- 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2011.02646.x · DOI
- 10.1186/1939-4551-7-25 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0194-5998(95)70152-4 · DOI
- Agthoven M, 2001, Quality of life of patients with refractory chronic rhinosinusitis: effects of filgrastim treatment, Am J Rhinol, 15, 231, 10.1177/194589240101500403 · DOI
- 10.1177/000348941112000701 · DOI
- 10.1177/194589240201600102 · DOI
- 10.1097/MLG.0b013e31804b1a90 · DOI
- 10.4193/Rhino50E2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/coa.12455 · DOI · Paper page
- Takhar A, 2014, Validation of the sino‐nasal outcome test‐23 in septorhinoplasty surgery, Rhinology, 52, 320
- 10.1097/MLG.0b013e318173a025 · DOI
- Holmström M, 1990, Assessment of nasal obstruction. A comparison between rhinomanometry and nasal inspiratory peak flow, Rhinology, 28, 191
- 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2008.01870.x · DOI
- 10.1177/0194599811435638 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2009.01995.x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.otohns.2003.09.016 · DOI
- 10.1007/s00405-011-1916-0 · DOI
- 10.2500/ajra.2011.25.3650 · DOI
- 10.1001/archoto.2010.1 · DOI
- Andrews P, 2016, Outcomes in endoscopic sinus surgery: olfaction, NOSE scale and Quality of Life in a Prospective Cohort Study, Clin Otolaryngol, 1
- 10.1111/j.1365-2273.1993.tb00803.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2005.00779.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/lary.25352 · DOI
- 10.1007/s00405-011-1803-8 · 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
- Whitcroft, K. L., Andrews, P. J., & Randhawa, P. S.
- Affiliations
- University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Whitcroft, K.L.
- Venue
- Clinical Otolaryngology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2017-03-26
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1187-1192
- ISSN
- 0307-7772 (ISSN-L)
- 1749-4478
- 1749-4486
- OpenAlex
- W2592480334
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 3.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Clinical Otolaryngology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Otorhinolaryngology › Sinusitis and nasal conditions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Nasal Surgery and Airway Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cystic Fibrosis Research Advances
- Keywords
- peak nasal inspiratory flow, functional endoscopic sinus surgery, chronic rhinosinusitis, quality of life, nasal patency, SNOT-22, nasal obstruction, nasal polyps, objective outcome measures
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Inhalation, Chronic Disease, Endoscopy, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nasal Polyps, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Respiratory Function Tests, Rhinitis, Sinusitis, Reproducibility of Results, Cohort Studies, Treatment Outcome
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
