Determinants of physician assessment of chronic rhinosinusitis disease control using EPOS 2020 criteria and the importance of incorporating patient perspectives of disease control Article

Full Text via DOI: 10.1002/alr.23168 Web of Science: 000986175900001

Cited authors

  • Sedaghat AR, Caradonna DS, Chandra RK, Franzese C, Gray ST, Halderman AA, Hopkins C, Kuan EC, Lee JT, McCoul ED, O'Brien EK, Pletcher SD, Pynnonen MA, Wang EW, Wise SK, Woodworth BA, Yao WC, Phillips KM


  • BackgroundWe identify chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) manifestations associated with how rhinologists assess CRS control, with a focus on patient perspectives (patient-reported CRS control). MethodsFifteen rhinologists were provided with real-world data from 200 CRS patients. Participating rhinologists first classified patients' CRS control as "controlled," "partly controlled," and "uncontrolled" using seven CRS manifestations reflecting European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS) CRS control criteria (nasal obstruction, drainage, impaired smell, facial pain/pressure, sleep disturbance, use of systemic antibiotics/corticosteroids in past 6 months, and nasal endoscopy findings) and patient-reported CRS control. They then classified patients' CRS control without knowledge of patient-reported CRS control. Interrater reliability and agreement of rhinologist-assessed CRS control with patient-reported CRS control and EPOS guidelines were determined. ResultsCRS control classification with and without knowledge of patient-reported CRS control was highly consistent across rhinologists (kappa(w) = 0.758). Rhinologist-assessed CRS control agreed with patient-reported CRS control significantly better when rhinologists had knowledge of patient-reported CRS control (kappa(w) = 0.736 vs. kappa(w) = 0.554, p < 0.001). Patient-reported CRS control, nasal obstruction, drainage, and endoscopy findings were most strongly associated with rhinologists' assessment of CRS control. Rhinologists' CRS control assessments weakly agreed with EPOS CRS control guidelines with (kappa(w) = 0.529) and without (kappa(w) = 0.538) patient-reported CRS control. Rhinologists classified CRS as more controlled than EPOS guidelines in almost 50% of cases. ConclusionsThis study directly demonstrates the importance of patient-reported CRS control as a dominant influence on rhinologists' CRS control assessment. Knowledge of patient-reported CRS control may better align rhinologists' CRS control assessments and treatment decisions with patients' perspectives.

Publication date

  • 2023

International Standard Serial Number (ISSN)

  • 2042-6976

Number of pages

  • 14