American journal of rhinology · 2005
Objective versus subjective outcomes assessment in rhinology.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Stewart Michael G, Smith Timothy L
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Prior studies on the relationship between computed tomography scan findings and patient-based quality of life in chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) have found very low correlations. Whereas surprising, similarfindings have been noted in other diseases.
METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the association between objective and subjective findings in nasal septal deformity and a systematic review and synthesis of the literature on CRS and other diseases.
RESULTS: We found no association between objective anatomic findings and subjective symptoms in nasal obstruction (R = 0.03; Kruskal-Wallis test, p = 0.97). Multiple studies in CRS and other diseases-sleep apnea, hearing loss, asthma, etc.- have found similarly low correlations between objective and subjective testing.
CONCLUSION: For nasal septal deviation and CRS, the patient's subjective perception of disease severity has, at best, a very weak association with objective assessment of severity. Patient-based outcomes assessment remains important; these instruments apparently quantify an aspect of disease not detected by objective testing.
METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the association between objective and subjective findings in nasal septal deformity and a systematic review and synthesis of the literature on CRS and other diseases.
RESULTS: We found no association between objective anatomic findings and subjective symptoms in nasal obstruction (R = 0.03; Kruskal-Wallis test, p = 0.97). Multiple studies in CRS and other diseases-sleep apnea, hearing loss, asthma, etc.- have found similarly low correlations between objective and subjective testing.
CONCLUSION: For nasal septal deviation and CRS, the patient's subjective perception of disease severity has, at best, a very weak association with objective assessment of severity. Patient-based outcomes assessment remains important; these instruments apparently quantify an aspect of disease not detected by objective testing.