Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Medline Book to support NIHPA logoLink to Medline Book to support NIHPA
. 2024 Mar;28(10):1–213. doi: 10.3310/MVFR4028

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

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
PMCID: PMC11017631  PMID: 38477237

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.

Plain language summary

Septoplasty is an operation to straighten the septum, which is the partition wall between the nostrils inside the nose. Septoplasty can be used as a treatment for people who have a bent septum and symptoms of a blocked nose, such as difficulty sleeping and exercising. Medical management (a saltwater spray to clear the nose followed by a nose steroid spray) is an alternative treatment to septoplasty. The Nasal AIRway Obstruction Study (NAIROS) aimed to find out whether septoplasty or medical management is a better treatment for people with a bent septum and symptoms of a blocked nose. We recruited 378 patients with at least moderately severe nose symptoms from 17 hospitals in England, Scotland and Wales to take part in the NAIROS. Participants were randomly put into one of two groups: septoplasty or medical management. Participants’ nose symptoms were measured both when they joined the study and after 6 months, using a questionnaire called the Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items. This questionnaire was chosen because patients reported that it included symptoms that were important to them. Other studies have shown that a 9-point change in the Sino-nasal Outcome Test-22 items score is significant. After 6 months, on average, people in the septoplasty group improved by 25 points, whereas people in the medical management group improved by 5 points. We saw improvement after septoplasty among patients with moderate symptoms, and among those with severe symptoms. Most patients who we spoke to after a septoplasty were happy with their treatment, but some would have liked more information about what to expect after their nose surgery. In the short term, septoplasty is more costly than medical management. However, over the longer term, taking into account all the costs and benefits of treatment, suggests that septoplasty would be considered good value for money for the NHS.

Full text of this article can be found in Bookshelf.

References

  1. Baumann I, Baumann H. A new classification of septal deviations. Rhinology 2007;45:220–3. [PubMed]
  2. Harrill WC, Pillsbury HC, McGuirt WF, Stewart MG. Radiofrequency turbinate reduction: a NOSE evaluation. Laryngoscope 2007;117:1912–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLG.0b013e3181271414 doi: 10.1097/MLG.0b013e3181271414. [DOI] [PubMed]
  3. Clement WA, White PS. Trends in turbinate surgery literature: a 35-year review. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2001;26:124–8. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2273.2001.00450.x doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2273.2001.00450.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  4. Baumann I. Quality of life before and after septoplasty and rhinoplasty. GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2010;9:Doc06. doi: 10.3205/cto000070. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  5. Bhattacharyya N. Ambulatory sinus and nasal surgery in the United States: demographics and perioperative outcomes. Laryngoscope 2010;120:635–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.20777 doi: 10.1002/lary.20777. [DOI] [PubMed]
  6. NHS Digital. Hospital Episode Statistics, Admitted Patient Care – England 2019–20. URL: https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/hospital-admitted-patient-care-activity/2019-20 (accessed 24 January 2020).
  7. Gray L. Deviated nasal septum. Incidence and etiology. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl 1978;87(Suppl. 50):3–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/00034894780873S201 doi: 10.1177/00034894780873s201. [DOI] [PubMed]
  8. Ruano-Gil D, Montserrat-Viladiu JM, Vilanova-Trías J, Burgés-Vila J. Deformities of the nasal septum in human foetuses. Rhinology 1980;18:105–9. [PubMed]
  9. Wojas O S-DP, Grzanka A, Krzych-Fałta E, Samoliński BK. Nasal septum deviation by age and sex in a study population of Poles. J Rhinol Otol 2019;7:1–6.
  10. Grymer LF, Hilberg O, Pedersen OF. Prediction of nasal obstruction based on clinical examination and acoustic rhinometry. Rhinology 1997;35:53–7. [PubMed]
  11. Jessen M, Malm L. Definition, prevalence and development of nasal obstruction. Allergy 1997;52(Suppl. 40):3–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1398-9995.1997.tb04876.x doi: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.1997.tb04876.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  12. Radon K, Gerhardinger U, Schulze A, Zock JP, Norback D, Toren K, et al. Occupation and adult onset of rhinitis in the general population. Occup Environ Med 2008;65:38–43. https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.2006.031542 doi: 10.1136/oem.2006.031542. [DOI] [PubMed]
  13. Ryan CM, Bradley TD. Pathogenesis of obstructive sleep apnea. J Appl Physiol 2005;99:2440–50. https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00772.2005 doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00772.2005. [DOI] [PubMed]
  14. Sharma S, Wormald JCR, Fishman JM, Andrews P, Kotecha BT. Rhinological interventions for obstructive sleep apnoea – a systematic review and descriptive meta-analysis. J Laryngol Otol 2019;133:168–76. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022215119000240 doi: 10.1017/S0022215119000240. [DOI] [PubMed]
  15. Koutsourelakis I, Georgoulopoulos G, Perraki E, Vagiakis E, Roussos C, Zakynthinos SG. Randomised trial of nasal surgery for fixed nasal obstruction in obstructive sleep apnoea. Eur Respir J 2008;31:110–7. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.00087607 doi: 10.1183/09031936.00087607. [DOI] [PubMed]
  16. Velasco LC, Arima LM, Tiago RS. Assessment of symptom improvement following nasal septoplasty with or without turbinectomy. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2011;77:577–83. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1808-86942011000500007 doi: 10.1590/S1808-86942011000500007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  17. Min YG, Jung HW, Kim CS. Prevalence study of nasal septal deformities in Korea: results of a nation-wide survey. Rhinology 1995;33:61–5. [PubMed]
  18. Smith KD, Edwards PC, Saini TS, Norton NS. The prevalence of concha bullosa and nasal septal deviation and their relationship to maxillary sinusitis by volumetric tomography. Int J Dent 2010;2010:404982. https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/404982 doi: 10.1155/2010/404982. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  19. Moshfeghi M, Abedian B, Ghazizadeh Ahsaie M, Tajdini F. Prevalence of nasal septum deviation using cone-beam computed tomography: a cross-sectional study. Contemp Clin Dent 2020;11:223–8. https://doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_110_19 doi: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_110_19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  20. Dinis PB, Haider H. Septoplasty: long-term evaluation of results. Am J Otolaryngol 2002;23:85–90. https://doi.org/10.1053/ajot.2002.30987 doi: 10.1053/ajot.2002.30987. [DOI] [PubMed]
  21. Haroon Y, Saleh HA, Abouissa AH. Nasal soft tissue obstruction improvement after septoplasty without turbinectomy. Eur Arch Oto Rhino Laryngol 2012;270:2649–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00405-012-2304-0 doi: 10.1007/s00405-012-2304-0. [DOI] [PubMed]
  22. Günbey E, Günbey HP, Uygun S, Karabulut H, Cingi C. Is preoperative paranasal sinus computed tomography necessary for every patient undergoing septoplasty? Int Forum Allergy Rhinol 2015;5:839–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/alr.21545 doi: 10.1002/alr.21545. [DOI] [PubMed]
  23. Haight JS, Cole P. The site and function of the nasal valve. Laryngoscope 1983;93:49–55. https://doi.org/10.1288/00005537-198301000-00009 doi: 10.1288/00005537-198301000-00009. [DOI] [PubMed]
  24. Bachmann W, Legler U. Studies on the structure and function of the anterior section of the nose by means of luminal impressions. Acta Otolaryngol 1972;73:433–42. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016487209138963 doi: 10.3109/00016487209138963. [DOI] [PubMed]
  25. Cole P, Chaban R, Naito K, Oprysk D. The obstructive nasal septum. Effect of simulated deviations on nasal airflow resistance. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1988;114:410–2. https://doi.org/10.1001/archotol.1988.01860160054020 doi: 10.1001/archotol.1988.01860160054020. [DOI] [PubMed]
  26. Bonaparte JP, Campbell R. A prospective cohort study assessing the clinical utility of the Cottle maneuver in nasal septal surgery. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2018;47:45. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40463-018-0292-9 doi: 10.1186/s40463-018-0292-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  27. Fokkens WJ, Lund VJ, Hopkins C, Hellings PW, Kern R, Reitsma S, et al. European position paper on rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps 2020. Rhinology 2020;58(Suppl. S29):1–464. https://doi.org/10.4193/Rhin20.601 doi: 10.4193/Rhin20.600. [DOI] [PubMed]
  28. Kahana-Zweig R, Geva-Sagiv M, Weissbrod A, Secundo L, Soroker N, Sobel N. Measuring and characterizing the human nasal cycle. PLOS ONE 2016;11:e0162918. https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0162918 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0162918. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  29. Hol MK, Huizing EH. Treatment of inferior turbinate pathology: a review and critical evaluation of the different techniques. Rhinology 2000;38:157–66. [PubMed]
  30. Berger G, Hammel I, Berger R, Avraham S, Ophir D. Histopathology of the inferior turbinate with compensatory hypertrophy in patients with deviated nasal septum. Laryngoscope 2000;110:2100–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005537-200012000-00024 doi: 10.1097/00005537-200012000-00024. [DOI] [PubMed]
  31. ENT UK, The Royal College of Surgeons. Resources. URL: www.entuk.org/guidelines (accessed 12 November 2020).
  32. Sipilä J, Suonpää J, Silvoniemi P, Laippala P. Correlations between subjective sensation of nasal patency and rhinomanometry in both unilateral and total nasal assessment. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 1995;57:260–3. https://doi.org/10.1159/000276754 doi: 10.1159/000276754. [DOI] [PubMed]
  33. Roithmann R, Cole P, Chapnik J, Barreto SM, Szalai JP, Zamel N. Acoustic rhinometry, rhinomanometry, and the sensation of nasal patency: a correlative study. J Otolaryngol 1994;23:454–8. [PubMed]
  34. Stewart MG, Witsell DL, Smith TL, Weaver EM, Yueh B, Hannley MT. Development and validation of the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scale. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004;130:157–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2003.09.016 doi: 10.1016/j.otohns.2003.09.016. [DOI] [PubMed]
  35. Rhee JS, Sullivan CD, Frank DO, Kimbell JS, Garcia GJ. A systematic review of patient-reported nasal obstruction scores: defining normative and symptomatic ranges in surgical patients. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2014;16:219–25. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2013.2473 doi: 10.1001/jamafacial.2013.2473. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  36. Lipan MJ, Most SP. Development of a severity classification system for subjective nasal obstruction. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2013;15:358–61. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial.2013.344 doi: 10.1001/jamafacial.2013.344. [DOI] [PubMed]
  37. Lal D, Rounds AB, Divekar R. Gender-specific differences in chronic rhinosinusitis patients electing endoscopic sinus surgery. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol 2016;6:278–86. https://doi.org/10.1002/alr.21667 doi: 10.1002/alr.21667. [DOI] [PubMed]
  38. NHS Digital. Hospital Episode Statistics Admitted Patient Care – England, 2014–15. URL: www.hscic.gov.uk/hes (accessed 18 January 2021).
  39. Park SW, Choi J, Park HO, Lim YS, Lee KS, Kim NG, et al. Are gender differences in external noses caused by differences in nasal septal growth? J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2014;42:1140–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcms.2014.01.045 doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2014.01.045. [DOI] [PubMed]
  40. Siegel NS, Gliklich RE, Taghizadeh F, Chang Y. Outcomes of septoplasty. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;122:228–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0194-5998(00)70244-0 doi: 10.1016/S0194-5998(00)70244-0. [DOI] [PubMed]
  41. Bezerra TF, Stewart MG, Fornazieri MA, Pilan RR, Pinna Fde R, Padua FG, Voegels RL. Quality of life assessment septoplasty in patients with nasal obstruction. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2012;78:57–62. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1808-86942012000300011 doi: 10.1590/S1808-86942012000300011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  42. Buckland JR, Thomas S, Harries PG. Can the Sino-nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) be used as a reliable outcome measure for successful septal surgery? Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2003;28:43–7. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2273.2003.00663.x doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2273.2003.00663.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  43. Hytönen ML, Lilja M, Mäkitie AA, Sintonen H, Roine RP. Does septoplasty enhance the quality of life in patients? Eur Arch Oto Rhino Laryngol 2012;269:2497–503. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00405-012-1931-9 doi: 10.1007/s00405-012-1931-9. [DOI] [PubMed]
  44. Abdalla S, Alreefy H, Hopkins C. Prevalence of Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) symptoms in patients undergoing surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis in the England and Wales National prospective audit. Clin Otolaryngol 2012;37:276–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-4486.2012. 02527.x doi: 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2012.02527.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  45. Hopkins C, Gillett S, Slack R, Lund VJ, Browne JP. Psychometric validity of the 22-item Sinonasal Outcome Test. Clin Otolaryngol 2009;34:447–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1749-4486.2009.01995.x doi: 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2009.01995.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  46. Pannu KK, Chadha S, Kaur IP. Evaluation of benefits of nasal septal surgery on nasal symptoms and general health. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2009;61:59–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s12070-009-0036-2 doi: 10.1007/s12070-009-0036-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  47. Buckland JR, Thomas S, Harries PG. Can the Sino-nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) be used as a reliable outcome measure for successful septal surgery? Clin Otolaryngol 2003;28:43–7. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2273.2003.00663.x doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2273.2003.00663.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  48. Aziz T, Biron VL, Ansari K, Flores-Mir C. Measurement tools for the diagnosis of nasal septal deviation: a systematic review. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2014;43:11. https://doi.org/10.1186/ 1916-0216-43-11 doi: 10.1186/1916-0216-43-11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  49. Boyce JM, Eccles R. Assessment of subjective scales for selection of patients for nasal septal surgery. Clin Otolaryngol 2006;31:297–302. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-4486.2006.01243.x doi: 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2006.01243.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  50. Schumacher MJ. Nasal dyspnea: the place of rhinomanometry in its objective assessment. Am J Rhinol 2004;18:41–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/194589240401800109 [PubMed]
  51. Sipilä J, Suonpää J, Laippala P. Sensation of nasal obstruction compared to rhinomanometric results in patients referred for septoplasty. Rhinology 1994;32:141–4. [PubMed]
  52. Tomkinson A. Acoustic rhinometry: its place in rhinology. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1997;22:189–91. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2273.1997.00045.x doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2273.1997.00045.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  53. Hanif J, Eccles R, Jawad SS. Use of a portable spirometer for studies on the nasal cycle. Am J Rhinol 2001;15:303–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/194589240101500503 [PubMed]
  54. Roblin DG, Eccles R. Normal range for nasal partitioning of airflow determined by nasal spirometry in 100 healthy subjects. Am J Rhinol 2003;17:179–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 194589240301700401 [PubMed]
  55. Cuddihy PJ, Eccles R. The use of nasal spirometry as an objective measure of nasal septal deviation and the effectiveness of septal surgery. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2003;28:325–30. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2273.2003.00714.x doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2273.2003.00714.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  56. Boyce JM, Eccles R. Assessment of subjective scales for selection of patients for nasal septal surgery. Clin Otolaryngol 2006;31:297–302. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-4486.2006.01243.x doi: 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2006.01243.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  57. Døsen LK, Kvinnesland K, TarAngen M, Shiryaeva O, Gay C, Haye R. Unilateral and bilateral PNIF in quality control of nasal septal surgery. Int J Otolaryngol 2018;2018:7846843. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/7846843 doi: 10.1155/2018/7846843. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  58. van Egmond MMHT, Rovers MM, Hannink G, Hendriks CTM, van Heerbeek N. Septoplasty with or without concurrent turbinate surgery versus non-surgical management for nasal obstruction in adults with a deviated septum: a pragmatic, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2019;394:314–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30354-X doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30354-X. [DOI] [PubMed]
  59. Ayling K, Brierley S, Johnson B, Heller S, Eiser C. How standard is standard care? Exploring control group outcomes in behaviour change interventions for young people with type 1 diabetes. Psychol Health 2015;30:85–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2014.953528 doi: 10.1080/08870446.2014.953528. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  60. Calder NJ, Swan IRC. Outcomes of septal surgery. J Laryngol Otol 2007;121:1060–3. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022215107006500 doi: 10.1017/S0022215107006500. [DOI] [PubMed]
  61. van Egmond MMHT, Rovers MM, Tillema AHJ, van Neerbeek N. Septoplasty for nasal obstruction due to a deviated nasal septum in adults: a systematic review. Rhinology 2018;56:195–208. https://doi.org/10.4193/Rhin18.016 doi: 10.4193/Rhin18.016. [DOI] [PubMed]
  62. Tsang CLN, Nguyen T, Sivesind T, Cervin A. Long-term patient-related outcome measures of septoplasty: a systematic review. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2018;275:1039–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-018-4874-y doi: 10.1007/s00405-018-4874-y. [DOI] [PubMed]
  63. Arunachalam PS, Kitcher E, Gray J, Wilson JA. Nasal septal surgery: evaluation of symptomatic and general health outcomes. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2001;26:367–70. https://doi.org/10.1046/ j.0307-7772.2001.00481.x doi: 10.1046/j.0307-7772.2001.00481.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  64. Wang T, Han D, Zhang L, Zang H, Li Y, Liu C. A modified septoplasty with three high tension lines resection. Acta Otolaryngol 2010;130:593–9. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016480903311237 doi: 10.3109/00016480903311237. [DOI] [PubMed]
  65. Daudia A, Alkhaddour U, Sithole J, Mortimore S. A prospective objective study of the cosmetic sequelae of nasal septal surgery. Acta Otolaryngol 2006;126:1201–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 00016480600672675 doi: 10.1080/00016480600672675. [DOI] [PubMed]
  66. Dąbrowska-Bień J, Skarżyński PH, Gwizdalska I, Łazęcka K, Skarżyński H. Complications in septoplasty based on a large group of 5639 patients. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2018;275:1789–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-018-4990-8 doi: 10.1007/s00405-018-4990-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  67. Wang WW, Dong BC. Comparison on effectiveness of trans-septal suturing versus nasal packing after septoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2017;274:3915–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-017-4709-2 doi: 10.1007/s00405-017-4709-2. [DOI] [PubMed]
  68. Kim JS, Kwon SH. Is nonabsorbable nasal packing after septoplasty essential? A meta-analysis. Laryngoscope 2017;127:1026–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.26436 doi: 10.1002/lary.26436. [DOI] [PubMed]
  69. Quinn JG, Bonaparte JP, Kilty SJ. Postoperative management in the prevention of complications after septoplasty: a systematic review. Laryngoscope 2013;123:1328–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/ lary.23848 doi: 10.1002/lary.23848. [DOI] [PubMed]
  70. Rudy SF, Kandathil C, Spataro EA, Moubayed SP, Most SP. Effect of nasal steroids on nasal obstruction in septal deviation: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Facial Plast Surg Aesthet Med 2020;22:243–8. https://doi.org/10.1089/fpsam.2020.0150 doi: 10.1089/fpsam.2020.0150. [DOI] [PubMed]
  71. Donaldson AM, Choby G, Kim DH, Marks LA, Lal D. Intranasal corticosteroid therapy: systematic review and meta-analysis of reported safety and adverse effects in adults. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2020;163:1097–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599820931455 doi: 10.1177/0194599820931455. [DOI] [PubMed]
  72. Chong LY, Head K, Hopkins C, Philpott C, Burton MJ, Schilder AG. Different types of intranasal steroids for chronic rhinosinusitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;4:CD011993. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011993.pub2 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011993.pub2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  73. Liu L, Pan M, Li Y, Tan G, Yang Y. Efficacy of nasal irrigation with hypertonic saline on chronic rhinosinusitis: systematic review and meta-analysis. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2020;86:639–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjorl.2020.03.008 doi: 10.1016/j.bjorl.2020.03.008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  74. Chong LY, Head K, Hopkins C, Philpott C, Glew S, Scadding G, et al. Saline irrigation for chronic rhinosinusitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;4:CD011995. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011995.pub2 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011995.pub2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  75. Head K, Snidvongs K, Glew S, Scadding G, Schilder AG, Philpott C, Hopkins C. Saline irrigation for allergic rhinitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2018;6:CD012597. https://doi.org/10.1002/ 14651858.CD012597.pub2 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012597.pub2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  76. Chen XZ, Feng SY, Chang LH, Lai XP, Chen XH, Li X, Zhang GH. The effects of nasal irrigation with various solutions after endoscopic sinus surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Laryngol Otol 2018;132:673–9. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022215118000919 doi: 10.1017/S0022215118000919. [DOI] [PubMed]
  77. Kanjanawasee D, Seresirikachorn K, Chitsuthipakorn W, Snidvongs K. Hypertonic saline versus isotonic saline nasal irrigation: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Rhinol Allergy 2018;32:269–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1945892418773566 doi: 10.1177/1945892418773566. [DOI] [PubMed]
  78. Segboer C, Gevorgyan A, Avdeeva K, Chusakul S, Kanjanaumporn J, Aeumjaturapat S, et al. Intranasal corticosteroids for non-allergic rhinitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019;11:CD010592. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010592.pub2 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010592.pub2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  79. Succar EF, Turner JH, Chandra RK. Nasal saline irrigation: a clinical update. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol 2019;9:S4–S8. https://doi.org/10.1002/alr.22330 doi: 10.1002/alr.22330. [DOI] [PubMed]
  80. Rennie KJ, O’Hara J, Rousseau N, Stocken D, Howel D, Ternent L, et al. Nasal Airway Obstruction Study (NAIROS): a Phase III, open-label, mixed-methods, multicentre randomised controlled trial of septoplasty versus medical management of a septal deviation with nasal obstruction. Trials 2020;21:179. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-4081-1 doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-4081-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  81. Stewart MG, Smith TL, Weaver EM, Witsell DL, Yueh B, Hannley MT, et al. Outcomes after nasal septoplasty: results from the Nasal Obstruction Septoplasty Effectiveness (NOSE) study. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004;130:283–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2003.12.004 doi: 10.1016/j.otohns.2003.12.004. [DOI] [PubMed]
  82. Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002;21:271–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6296(01)00130-8 doi: 10.1016/s0167-6296(01)00130-8. [DOI] [PubMed]
  83. Matthews JN, Altman DG, Campbell MJ, Royston P. Analysis of serial measurements in medical research. BMJ 1990;300:230–5. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.300.6719.230 doi: 10.1136/bmj.300.6719.230. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  84. Bray A. NAIROS: A Guide to Measurements of Nasal Patency. URL: https://youtu.be/ZuK66Jf_iGc (accessed 27 August 2021).
  85. Newcastle University. NAIROS. URL: www.nairos.co.uk (accessed 2 September 2021).
  86. Arunachalam PS, Kitcher E, Gray J, Wilson JA. Nasal septal surgery: evaluation of symptomatic and general health outcomes. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 2001;26:367–70. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0307-7772.2001.00481.x doi: 10.1046/j.0307-7772.2001.00481.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  87. Enache A, Lieder A, Issing W. Nasal septoplasty with submucosal diathermy to inferior turbinates improves symptoms at 3 months postoperatively in a study of one hundred and one patients. Clin Otolaryngol 2014;39:57–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/coa.12219 doi: 10.1111/coa.12219. [DOI] [PubMed]
  88. Phillips PS, Stow N, Timperley DG, Sacks R, Srubiski A, Harvey RJ, Marcells GN. Functional and cosmetic outcomes of external approach septoplasty. Am J Rhinol Allergy 2011;25:351–7. https://doi.org/10.2500/ajra.2011.25.3650 doi: 10.2500/ajra.2011.25.3650. [DOI] [PubMed]
  89. Poirrier AL, Ahluwalia S, Goodson A, Ellis M, Bentley M, Andrews P. Is the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test-22 a suitable evaluation for septorhinoplasty? Laryngoscope 2013;123:76–81. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.23615 doi: 10.1002/lary.23615. [DOI] [PubMed]
  90. Bonetti M, Gelber RD. A graphical method to assess treatment-covariate interactions using the Cox model on subsets of the data. Stat Med 2000;19:2595–609. https://doi.org/10.1002/ 1097-0258(20001015)19:19<2595::AID-SIM562>3.0.CO;2-M doi: 10.1002/1097-0258(20001015)19:19<2595::aid-sim562>3.0.co;2-m. [DOI] [PubMed]
  91. Bonetti M, Gelber RD. Patterns of treatment effects in subsets of patients in clinical trials. Biostatistics 2004;5:465–81. https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/5.3.465 doi: 10.1093/biostatistics/5.3.465. [DOI] [PubMed]
  92. Bonetti M, Zahrieh D, Cole BF, Gelber RD. A small sample study of the STEPP approach to assessing treatment-covariate interactions in survival data. Stat Med 2009;28:1255–68. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.3524 doi: 10.1002/sim.3524. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  93. Yip WK, Bonetti M, Cole BF, Barcella W, Wang XV, Lazar A, Gelber RD. Subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot (STEPP) analysis for continuous, binary, and count outcomes. Clin Trials 2016;13:382–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774516643297 doi: 10.1177/1740774516643297. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  94. Legislation.gov.uk. Commission Directive 2005/28/EC of 8 April 2005 Laying Down Principles and Detailed Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice as Regards Investigational Medicinal products for Human Use, as well as the Requirements for Authorisation of the Manufacturing or Importation of such Products. URL: www.legislation.gov.uk/eudr/2005/28 (accessed 30 June 2022).
  95. Lipan MJ, Most SP. Development of a severity classification system for subjective nasal obstruction. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2013;15:358–61. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamafacial. 2013.344 doi: 10.1001/jamafacial.2013.344. [DOI] [PubMed]
  96. Gillett S, Hopkins C, Slack R, Browne JP. A pilot study of the SNOT 22 score in adults with no sinonasal disease. Clin Otolaryngol 2009;34:467–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-4486.2009. 01975.x doi: 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2009.01975.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  97. Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement. Cost Eff Resour Alloc 2013;11:6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-7547-11-6 doi: 10.1186/1478-7547-11-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  98. NHS Improvement. 2017/18 Reference Costs. URL: https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20200501111106/https://improvement.nhs.uk/resources/reference-costs/ (accessed 27 June 2022).
  99. Curtis L, Burns A. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2018. Canterbury: PSSRU, University of Kent; 2018.
  100. Rubie I, Haighton C, O’Hara J, Rousseau N, Steen N, Stocken DD, et al. The NAtional randomised controlled Trial of Tonsillectomy IN Adults (NATTINA): a clinical and cost-effectiveness study: study protocol for a randomised control trial. Trials 2015;16:263. https://doi.org/10.1186/ s13063-015-0768-0 doi: 10.1186/s13063-015-0768-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  101. Pickard R, Chadwick T, Oluboyede Y, Brennand C, von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff A, McClurg D, et al. Continuous low-dose antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent urinary tract infection in adults who perform clean intermittent self-catheterisation: the AnTIC RCT. Health Technol Assess 2018;22(24). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta22240 doi: 10.3310/hta22240. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  102. Wordsworth S, Ludbrook A, Caskey F, Macleod A. Collecting unit cost data in multicentre studies. Creating comparable methods. Eur J Health Econ 2005;6:38–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-004-0259-9 doi: 10.1007/s10198-004-0259-9. [DOI] [PubMed]
  103. Curtis L, Burns A. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2020. Canterbury: PSSRU, University of Kent; 2020.
  104. NHS. Agenda for Change – Pay Rates. URL: www.healthcareers.nhs.uk/working-health/working-nhs/nhs-pay-and-benefits/agenda-change-pay-rates/agenda-change-pay-rates (accessed 21 September 2021).
  105. NHS. 2019/20 National Cost Collection Data Publication. URL: www.england.nhs.uk/publication/2019-20-national-cost-collection-data-publication (accessed 21 September 2021).
  106. Boots. Sterimar Isotonic Nasal Hygiene Spray 100 ml. URL: www.boots.com/sterimar-isotonic-nasal-hygiene-spray-100ml-10028386 (accessed 21 September 2021).
  107. Office for National Statistics. Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings. URL: www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/bulletins/annualsurveyofhoursandearnings/2021 (accessed 21 September 2021).
  108. Department for Transport. Transport Analysis Guidance. URL: www.gov.uk/guidance/transport-analysis-guidance-tag (accessed 21 September 2021).
  109. Automobile Association. Car Running Costs. URL: www.theaa.com/driving-advice/driving-costs/running-costs (accessed 21 September 2021).
  110. Mäkitie A, Aaltonen LM, Hytönen M, Malmberg H. Postoperative infection following nasal septoplasty. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 2000;543:165–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/000164800454297 doi: 10.1080/000164800454297. [DOI] [PubMed]
  111. Becker SS, Dobratz EJ, Stowell N, Barker D, Park SS. Revision septoplasty: review of sources of persistent nasal obstruction. Am J Rhinol 2008;22:440–4. https://doi.org/10.2500/ajr.2008.22.3200 doi: 10.2500/ajr.2008.22.3200. [DOI] [PubMed]
  112. Ware JE. SF-36 health survey update. Spine 2000;25:3130–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00008 doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00008. [DOI] [PubMed]
  113. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal 2013. Process and Methods [PMG9]. London: NICE; 2013. [PubMed]
  114. Fiebig DG. Seemingly unrelated regression. In Baltagi BH, editor. A Companion to Theoretical Econometrics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 2003.
  115. Willan AR, Briggs AH, Hoch JS. Regression methods for covariate adjustment and subgroup analysis for non-censored cost-effectiveness data. Health Econ 2004;13:461–75. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.843 doi: 10.1002/hec.843. [DOI] [PubMed]
  116. White IR, Royston P, Wood AM. Multiple imputation using chained equations: issues and guidance for practice. Stat Med 2011;30:377–99. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4067 doi: 10.1002/sim.4067. [DOI] [PubMed]
  117. Briggs A, Clark T, Wolstenholme J, Clarke P. Missing … presumed at random: cost-analysis of incomplete data. Health Econ 2003;12:377–92. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.766 doi: 10.1002/hec.766. [DOI] [PubMed]
  118. Barber JA, Thompson SG. Analysis of cost data in randomized trials: an application of the non-parametric bootstrap. Stat Med 2000;19:3219–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0258 (20001215)19:23<3219::AID-SIM623>3.0.CO;2-P doi: 10.1002/1097-0258(20001215)19:23<3219::aid-sim623>3.0.co;2-p. [DOI] [PubMed]
  119. Black WC. The CE plane: a graphic representation of cost-effectiveness. Med Decis Making 1990;10:212–4. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X9001000308 doi: 10.1177/0272989X9001000308. [DOI] [PubMed]
  120. Fenwick E, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Representing uncertainty: the role of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Health Econ 2001;10:779–87. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.635 doi: 10.1002/hec.635. [DOI] [PubMed]
  121. Gray A, Clarke P, Wolstenholme J, Wordsworth S. Applied Methods of Cost-effectiveness Analysis in Health Care. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.
  122. Donovan J, Hamdy F, Neal D, Peters T, Oliver S. Prostate Testing for Cancer and Treatment (ProtecT) feasibility study. Health Technol Assess 2003;7(14). https://doi.org/10.3310/hta7140 doi: 10.3310/hta7140. [DOI] [PubMed]
  123. Donovan J, Mills N, Smith M, Brindle L, Jacoby A, Peters T, et al. Quality improvement report: improving design and conduct of randomised trials by embedding them in qualitative research: ProtecT (Prostate testing for cancer and Treatment) study. BMJ 2002;325:766–70. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.325.7367.766 doi: 10.1136/bmj.325.7367.766. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  124. Donovan JL, Rooshenas L, Jepson M, Elliott D, Wade J, Avery K, et al. Optimising recruitment and informed consent in randomised controlled trials: the development and implementation of the QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI). Trials 2016;17:283. https://doi.org/10.1186/ s13063-016-1391-4 doi: 10.1186/s13063-016-1391-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  125. Rooshenas L, Paramasivan S, Jepson M, Donovan JL. Intensive triangulation of qualitative research and quantitative data to improve recruitment to randomized trials: the QuinteT approach. Qual Health Res 2019;29:672–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732319828693 doi: 10.1177/1049732319828693. [DOI] [PubMed]
  126. Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. London: Aldine Transaction; 1967. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014
  127. Rooshenas L, Elliott D, Wade J, Jepson M, Paramasivan S, Strong S, et al. Conveying equipoise during recruitment for clinical trials: qualitative synthesis of clinicians’ practices across six randomised controlled trials. PLOS Med 2016;13:e1002147. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002147 doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002147. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  128. Jepson M, Elliott D, Conefrey C, Wade J, Rooshenas L, Wilson C, et al. An observational study showed that explaining randomization using gambling-related metaphors and computer-agency descriptions impeded randomized clinical trial recruitment. J Clin Epidemiol 2018;99:75–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.02.018 doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.02.018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  129. Blencowe NS, Brown JM, Cook JA, Metcalfe C, Morton DG, Nicholl J, et al. Interventions in randomised controlled trials in surgery: issues to consider during trial design. Trials 2015;16:392. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-015-0918-4 doi: 10.1186/s13063-015-0918-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  130. Skivington K, Matthews L, Simpson SA, Craig P, Baird J, Blazeby JM, et al. A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: update of Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ 2021;374:n2061. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2061 doi: 10.1136/bmj.n2061. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  131. Donovan JL, Paramasivan S, de Salis I, Toerien M. Clear obstacles and hidden challenges: understanding recruiter perspectives in six pragmatic randomised controlled trials. Trials 2014;15:5. https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-15-5 doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  132. Davies G, Mills N, Holcombe C, Potter S, iBRA Steering Group. Perceived barriers to randomised controlled trials in breast reconstruction: obstacle to trial initiation or opportunity to resolve? A qualitative study. Trials 2020;21:316. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-4227-1 doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-4227-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  133. Bamford C, Poole M, Brittain K, Chew-Graham C, Fox C, Iliffe S, et al. Understanding the challenges to implementing case management for people with dementia in primary care in England: a qualitative study using normalization process theory. BMC Health Serv Res 2014;14:549. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-014-0549-6 doi: 10.1186/s12913-014-0549-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  134. Toyserkani NM, Frisch T. Are too many septal deviations operated on? A retrospective patient’s satisfaction questionnaire with 11 years follow-up. Rhinology 2012;50:185–90. https://doi.org/10.4193/Rhino11.218 doi: 10.4193/Rhino11.218. [DOI] [PubMed]
  135. Valsamidis K, Printza A, Constantinidis J, Triaridis S. The impact of olfactory dysfunction on the psychological status and quality of life of patients with nasal obstruction and septal deviation. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2020;24:e237–e246. https://doi.org/10.1055/ s-0040-1701269 doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1701269. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  136. May C, Finch T. Implementing, embedding, and integrating practices: an outline of normalization process theory. Sociology 2009;43:535–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038509103208
  137. May CR, Cummings A, Girling M, Bracher M, Mair FS, May CM, et al. Using normalization process theory in feasibility studies and process evaluations of complex healthcare interventions: a systematic review. Implementation Sci 2018;13:80. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0758-1 doi: 10.1186/s13012-018-0758-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  138. Saunders B, Sim J, Kingstone T, Baker S, Waterfield J, Bartlam B, et al. Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Qual Quant 2018;52:1893–907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8 doi: 10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  139. Grbich C. Qualitative Research in Health: An Introduction. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 1998.
  140. Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol 2013;13:117. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-117 doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-13-117. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  141. Srivastava A, Thomson SB. Framework analysis: a qualitative methodology for applied policy research. 4 Journal of Administration and Governance 2009;72.
  142. Paramasivan S, Huddart R, Hall E, Lewis R, Birtle A, Donovan JL. Key issues in recruitment to randomised controlled trials with very different interventions: a qualitative investigation of recruitment to the SPARE trial (CRUK/07/011). Trials 2011;12:78. https://doi.org/10.1186/ 1745-6215-12-78 doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-12-78. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  143. Chapman SJ, Shelton B, Mahmood H, Fitzgerald JE, Harrison EM, Bhangu A. Discontinuation and non-publication of surgical randomised controlled trials: observational study. BMJ 2014;349:g6870. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g6870 doi: 10.1136/bmj.g6870. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  144. Krieger JL, Palmer-Wackerly A, Dailey PM, Krok-Schoen JL, Schoenberg NE, Paskett ED. Comprehension of randomization and uncertainty in cancer clinical trials decision making among rural, Appalachian patients. J Cancer Educ 2015;30:743–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s13187-015-0789-0 doi: 10.1007/s13187-015-0789-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  145. Mittal R, Harris IA, Adie S, Naylor JM. Factors affecting patient participation in orthopaedic trials comparing surgery to non-surgical interventions. Contemp Clin Trials Commun 2016;3:153–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2016.05.007 doi: 10.1016/j.conctc.2016.05.007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  146. Biggs K, Hind D, Bradburn M, Swaby L, Brown S. Design, planning and implementation lessons learnt from a surgical multi-centre randomised controlled trial. Trials 2019;20:620. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3649-0 doi: 10.1186/s13063-019-3649-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  147. Horwood J, Johnson E, Gooberman-Hill R. Understanding involvement in surgical orthopaedic randomized controlled trials: a qualitative study of patient and health professional views and experiences. Int J Orthop Trauma Nurs 2016;20:3–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijotn.2015.05.002 doi: 10.1016/j.ijotn.2015.05.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  148. McDermott C, Vennik J, Philpott C, le Conte S, Thomas M, Eyles C, et al. Maximising recruitment to a randomised controlled trial for chronic rhinosinusitis using qualitative research methods: the MACRO conversation study. Trials 2021;22:54. https://doi.org/10.1186/ s13063-020-04993-w doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-04993-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  149. Karataş A. Pretreatment prediction of the outcomes of intranasal steroid sprays in cases with inferior turbinate hypertrophy. Turk Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2017;55:105–10. https://doi.org/10.5152/tao.2017.2443 doi: 10.5152/tao.2017.2443. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  150. Bellani ML. Psychological aspects in day-case surgery. Int J Surg 2008;6(Suppl. 1):44–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2008.12.019 doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2008.12.019. [DOI] [PubMed]
  151. Baggott C, Chan A, Hurford S, Fingleton J, Beasley R, Harwood M, et al. Patient preferences for asthma management: a qualitative study. BMJ Open 2020;10:e037491. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037491 doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037491. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  152. NHS East and North Hertfordshire Clinical Commissioning Group. Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire Priorities Forum Guidance. Subject: Septoplasty, Rhinoplasty, and Septorhinoplasty. 2016. URL: www.enhertsccg.nhs.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Feb2017/Guidance-71-Septoplasty-rhinoplasty-and-septorhinoplasty-Janaury-2017.pdf (accessed 27 June 2022).
  153. Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire Clinical Commissioning Group. Nasal Treatment – Non Cosmetic for All Ages Policy. URL: https://bnssgccg.nhs.uk/library/non-cosmetic-nasal-treatment-policy/ (accessed 27 June 2022).
  154. Siegel NS, Gliklich RE, Taghizadeh F, Chang Y. Outcomes of septoplasty. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000;122:228–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0194-5998(00)70244-0 doi: 10.1016/S0194-5998(00)70244-0. [DOI] [PubMed]
  155. Watson G, O’Hara J, Carding P, Lecouturier J, Stocken D, Fouweather T, Wilson J. TOPPITS: Trial Of Proton Pump Inhibitors in Throat Symptoms. Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 2016;17:175. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1267-7 doi: 10.1186/s13063-016-1267-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  156. UK Government. UK Population by Ethnicity: Population Statistics and 2011 Census Data. URL: www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/uk-population-by-ethnicity (accessed 2 September 2021).
  157. Pedersen L, Schiöler L, Finjan S, Davidsson Å, Sunnergren O, Holmberg K, et al. Prognostic factors for outcome after septoplasty in 888 patients from the Swedish National Septoplasty Register. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2019;276:2223–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-019-05440-6 doi: 10.1007/s00405-019-05440-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  158. Anderson K, Ritchie K, Chorney JM, Bezuhly M, Hong P. The impact of septoplasty on health-related quality of life in paediatric patients. Clin Otolaryngol 2016;41:144–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/coa.12485 doi: 10.1111/coa.12485. [DOI] [PubMed]
  159. Weinstein GS, Levin B. Effect of crossover on the statistical power of randomized studies. Ann Thorac Surg 1989;48:490–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-4975(10)66846-4 doi: 10.1016/s0003-4975(10)66846-4. [DOI] [PubMed]
  160. Boyce J, Eccles R. Assessment of subjective scales for selection of patients for nasal septal surgery – response. Clin Otolaryngol 2007;32:72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2273.2007.01366.x doi: 10.1111/j.1749-4486.2006.01243.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  161. Hanif J, Jawad SS, Eccles R. A study to assess the usefulness of a portable spirometer to quantify the severity of nasal septal deviation. Rhinology 2003;41:11–5. [PubMed]
  162. Gerecci D, Casanueva FJ, Mace JC, Annen A, Barrett DM, Kim MM, et al. Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) score outcomes after septorhinoplasty. Laryngoscope 2019;129:841–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.27578 doi: 10.1002/lary.27578. [DOI] [PubMed]
  163. Stewart MG, Witsell DL, Smith TL, Weaver EM, Yueh B, Hannley MT. Development and validation of the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scale. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004;130:157–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otohns.2003.09.016 doi: 10.1016/j.otohns.2003.09.016. [DOI] [PubMed]
  164. Bugten V, Nilsen AH, Thorstensen WM, Moxness MH, Amundsen MF, Nordgård S. Quality of life and symptoms before and after nasal septoplasty compared with healthy individuals. BMC Ear Nose Throat Disord 2016;16:13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12901-016-0031-7 doi: 10.1186/s12901-016-0031-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  165. Low WK. Can snoring relief after nasal septal surgery be predicted? Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1994;19:142–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2273.1994.tb01199.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2273.1994.tb01199.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  166. Deron P, Clement PA, Derde MP. Septal surgery and tubal function: early and late results. Rhinology 1995;33:7–9. [PubMed]
  167. Prus-Ostaszewska M, Wysocki J, Niemczyk K, Balcerzak J. The correlation of the results of the survey SNOT-20 of objective studies of nasal obstruction and the geometry of the nasal cavities. Otolaryngol Pol 2017;71:1–7. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0009.8408 doi: 10.5604/01.3001.0009.8408. [DOI] [PubMed]
  168. Holmstrom M. The use of objective measures in selecting patients for septal surgery. Rhinology 2010;48:387–93. https://doi.org/10.4193/Rhino10.072 doi: 10.4193/Rhino10.072. [DOI] [PubMed]
  169. Holmström M, Scadding GK, Lund VJ, Darby YC. Assessment of nasal obstruction. A comparison between rhinomanometry and nasal inspiratory peak flow. Rhinology 1990;28:191–6. [PubMed]
  170. Andrews PJ, Choudhury N, Takhar A, Poirrier AL, Jacques T, Randhawa PS. The need for an objective measure in septorhinoplasty surgery: are we any closer to finding an answer? Clin Otolaryngol 2015;40:698–703. https://doi.org/10.1111/coa.12455 doi: 10.1111/coa.12455. [DOI] [PubMed]
  171. Volstad I, Olafsson T, Steinsvik EA, Dahl FA, Skrindo I, Bachmann-Harildstad G. Minimal unilateral peak nasal inspiratory flow correlates with patient reported nasal obstruction. Rhinology 2019;57:436–43. https://doi.org/10.4193/Rhin19.178 doi: 10.4193/Rhin19.178. [DOI] [PubMed]
  172. Aziz T, Biron VL, Ansari K, Flores-Mir C. Measurement tools for the diagnosis of nasal septal deviation: a systematic review. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2014;43:11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1916-0216-43-11 doi: 10.1186/1916-0216-43-11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  173. Sundh C, Sunnergren O. Long-term symptom relief after septoplasty. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2015;272:2871–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-014-3406-7 doi: 10.1007/s00405-014-3406-7. [DOI] [PubMed]
  174. Dinis PB, Haider H. Septoplasty: long-term evaluation of results. Am J Otolaryngol 2002;23:85–90. https://doi.org/10.1053/ajot.2002.30987 doi: 10.1053/ajot.2002.30987. [DOI] [PubMed]
  175. Bohlin L, Dahlqvist A. Nasal airway resistance and complications following functional septoplasty: a ten-year follow-up study. Rhinology 1994;32:195–7. [PubMed]
  176. Becker SS, Dobratz EJ, Stowell N, Barker D, Park SS. Revision septoplasty: review of sources of persistent nasal obstruction. Am J Rhinol 2008;22:440–4. https://doi.org/10.2500/ajr.2008.22.3200 doi: 10.2500/ajr.2008.22.3200. [DOI] [PubMed]
  177. Wang WW, Dong BC. Comparison on effectiveness of trans-septal suturing versus nasal packing after septoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2017;274:3915–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-017-4709-2 doi: 10.1007/s00405-017-4709-2. [DOI] [PubMed]
  178. Kullar R, Frisenda J, Nassif PS. The more the merrier? Should antibiotics be used for rhinoplasty and septorhinoplasty? A review. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2018;6:e1972. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000001972 doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000001972. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  179. Hummel T, Whitcroft KL, Andrews P, Altundag A, Cinghi C, Costanzo RM, et al. Position paper on olfactory dysfunction. Rhinology 2016;56:1–30. https://doi.org/10.4193/Rhino16.248 doi: 10.4193/Rhino16.248. [DOI] [PubMed]
  180. Vuyk HD, Langenhuijsen KJ. Aesthetic sequelae of septoplasty. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1997;22:226–32. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2273.1997.00035.x doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2273.1997.00035.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  181. Chandra RK, Rohman GT, Walsh WE. Anterior palate sensory impairment after septal surgery. Am J Rhinol 2008;22:86–8. https://doi.org/10.2500/ajr.2008.22.3114 doi: 10.2500/ajr.2008.22.3114. [DOI] [PubMed]
  182. Pedersen LA, Dölvik S, Holmberg K, Emanuelsson CA, Johansson H, Schiöler L, et al. Surgery to relieve nasal obstruction: outcome for 366 patients operated on by one senior surgeon. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2021;278:3867–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-021-06696-7 doi: 10.1007/s00405-021-06696-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  183. Matthias C. [Surgery of the nasal septum and turbinates.] Laryngorhinootologie 2007;86(Suppl. 1):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-966303
  184. Cook JA. The challenges faced in the design, conduct and analysis of surgical randomised controlled trials. Trials 2009;10:9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-10-9 doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-10-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  185. McCulloch P, Taylor I, Sasako M, Lovett B, Griffin D. Randomised trials in surgery: problems and possible solutions. BMJ 2002;324:1448–51. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7351.1448 doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7351.1448. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  186. Han JK, Stringer SP, Rosenfeld RM, Archer SM, Baker DP, Brown SM, et al. Clinical consensus statement: septoplasty with or without inferior turbinate reduction. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2015;153:708–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599815606435 doi: 10.1177/0194599815606435. [DOI] [PubMed]
  187. Scadding GK, Durham SR, Mirakian R, Jones NS, Leech SC, Farooque S, et al. BSACI guidelines for the management of allergic and non-allergic rhinitis. Clin Exp Allergy 2008;38:19–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2222.2007.02888.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2222.2007.02888.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  188. Penagos M, Compalati E, Tarantini F, Baena-Cagnani CE, Passalacqua G, Canonica GW. Efficacy of mometasone furoate nasal spray in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. Meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trials. Allergy 2008;63:1280–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1398-9995.2008.01808.x doi: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2008.01808.x. [DOI] [PubMed]
  189. Ghouri N, Hippisley-Cox J, Newton J, Sheikh A. Trends in the epidemiology and prescribing of medication for allergic rhinitis in England. J R Soc Med 2008;101:466–72. https://doi.org/10.1258/jrsm.2008.080096 doi: 10.1258/jrsm.2008.080096. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  190. Curtis L, Burns A. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2015. Canterbury: PSSRU, University of Kent; 2015.

RESOURCES