Evidence mapPaperPMID 40484431Full record

ArticleBMJ open2025

Healthcare professionals' and patients' views and experiences of surgical and medical treatment for nasal obstruction: a qualitative interview study for a Nasal Airway Obstruction Study (NAIROS).

Kelly E Lloyd, Caroline Wilson, Sean Carrie, Leila Rooshenas, Janet A Wilson, David Hamilton, Emma Clark, Nikki Rousseau

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Kelly E LloydLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK k.e.lloyd@leeds.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0420-2342
Caroline WilsonNorthern Ireland Clinical Trials, Belfast, UK.
Sean CarrieFreeman Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Leila RooshenasSchool of Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6166-6055
Janet A WilsonPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
David HamiltonFreeman Hospital, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Emma ClarkNewcastle Clinical Trials Unit, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.
Nikki RousseauLeeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8826-3515

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo understand healthcare professionals' and patients' views and experiences of septoplasty and medical management (ie, nasal steroid and saline sprays) for nasal obstruction.

designNested qualitative study as part of the Nasal Airway Obstruction Study (NAIROS) trial. We used in-depth interviews to develop a coding framework based on thematic analysis.

settingNAIROS was a trial based in the UK from January 2018 to December 2020 that aimed to compare the effectiveness of septoplasty versus medical management.

participantsWe purposively sampled and interviewed 14 healthcare professionals (surgeons, research nurses) and 31 patients involved in the NAIROS trial across 14 UK hospital sites.

resultsIn usual practice, surgeons' decisions regarding treatment for nasal obstruction are based on a complex assessment of patients' symptoms, history and anatomy. Surgeons viewed septoplasty as a complex although routine operation, which is not guaranteed to improve symptoms of nasal obstruction. Some patients saw septoplasty, intuitively, as a 'fix' for a bent septum, whereas others were keen to avoid surgery if possible. Healthcare professionals welcomed the increased use of standard measurements if these were shown to provide a reliable guide to patient outcomes. However, they felt that it was important to retain an element of clinical judgement. Despite generally good outcomes from septoplasty, some patients still felt they had received little to no benefit from the operation. Patients also reported being underprepared for postsurgery recovery. Experiences were more varied with medical management, with some experiencing symptom improvement, but others discontinuing treatment due to difficulty or pain using the sprays, or perceived ineffectiveness. Remembering to use the sprays could be perceived as burdensome, although most patients were able to incorporate this into their daily routines.

conclusionsOur qualitative study demonstrated varied individual experiences among patients undergoing septoplasty and medical management. Surgeons welcomed more standard measurements to guide decision-making for septoplasty. For patients, better information about treatment mechanisms, treatment delivery and aftercare, and the development of decision support tools would enable shared decision-making and help to provide optimal patient experience of the treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN16168569.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelHealth PersonnelNasal ObstructionRhinoplastyAdultFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedNasal SeptumNasal SpraysQualitative ResearchUnited KingdomNasal SpraysHead & neck surgeryOTOLARYNGOLOGYQUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Identifiers

PMID40484431
PMCPMC12161377

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.