Identifying the most important outcomes for systematic reviews of interventions for rhinosinusitis in adults: Working with patients, public and practitioners

Hopkins, Claire, Philpott, Carl ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1125-3236, Crowe, Sally, Regan, Sandra, Degun, Aneeka, Papachristou, Iliana and Schilder, Anne G. M. (2016) Identifying the most important outcomes for systematic reviews of interventions for rhinosinusitis in adults: Working with patients, public and practitioners. Rhinology, 54 (1). pp. 20-26. ISSN 0300-0729

Microsoft Word (OMIPPP Rhinology final) - Accepted Version Download (622kB)

Abstract

Introduction: Promoting the assessment of health interventions using outcomes that matter to patients and practitioners is a key principle of Cochrane. Cochrane UK therefore commissioned the OMIPP project: Outcomes that are Most Important for Patients, Public and Practitioners to identify the outcomes they felt most important and should be evaluated in Cochrane reviews of health interventions for Chronic Rhinosinusitis (CRS). Methodology: Using direct emailing, social media and printed cards, an online survey was distributed to a wide range of people involved in the care of patients with CRS. Patients and practitioners were asked to list the 3 outcomes from treatments most important to them. Responses were analysed through development of a thematic framework based on the data. Results: Two hundred and thirty-five people completed the survey; 155 practitioners and 80 patients. Respondents provided 653 suggestions of important outcomes. 73% concerned symptoms of CRS, (nasal discharge or drip, facial pain, nasal blockage, headache, impaired sense of smell, congestion and breathing difficulties); 9% concerned quality of life, 4% reducing the need for further treatment and 4% side effects of treatment. Objective measurements of disease formed only 3% of responses. There was high level of agreement between patients and practitioners. Of 10 current Cochrane reviews on CRS, 9 include symptomatic outcomes identified by our survey as most important to patients and healthcare practitioners. Discussion: We have identified outcomes that both patients and their doctors consider should be included in reviews evaluating treatments of rhinosinusitis. We recommend that primary outcomes in future reviews focus on symptom-based outcomes. The ability to extract these data from relevant trials is dependant upon their inclusion in trials, and so it is important that building on this work a core outcome set for rhinosinusitis research is developed.

Item Type:	Article
Faculty \ School:	Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Norwich Medical School
UEA Research Groups:	Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Groups > Norwich Clinical Trials Unit Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Groups > Respiratory and Airways Group Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Research Centres > Lifespan Health
Related URLs:	https://www.rhinologyjournal.com/Rhinolo...
Depositing User:	Pure Connector
Date Deposited:	13 Nov 2015 17:00
Last Modified:	03 Oct 2024 16:30
URI:	https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/55261
DOI:	10.4193/Rhino15.199

Downloads

Actions (login required)

View Item