Sinus Assessment in adults with CF Version 1.0
Research type
Research Study
Full title
A study exploring the use of the Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) and Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF) in a stable adult Cystic Fibrosis cohort
IRAS ID
250685
Contact name
Ciara Long
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust
Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier
Central Portfolio management System number 41168, NIHR Clinical Research Network
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 5 months, 27 days
Research summary
The unified airway model acknowledges shared airway features between upper and lower airways and suggests a thorough investigation of both be undertaken. Studies suggest that two-thirds of patients with Cystic Fibrosis (CF) suffer either intermittent or chronic rhinosinusitis. Currently, there is no consensus on how to assess the sinuses in these patients. There are suggestions that we should use both subjective and objective measures as, used in isolation, they may not be as accurate at highlighting sino-nasal status.
This study will look at using a simple non-invasive objective assessment - Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF) - and a subjective marker - SinoNasal Outcome Test (SNOT 22) - in conjunction to assess a cohort of patients with CF. This will take place during an inpatient hospital stay. This will allow us to look at any association between the measures and whether the addition of the PNIF adds to the screening process.
A short survey will also be completed by the participants to gauge their feelings towards sino-nasal involvement in CF. This will add value to the study in terms of providing some information on demand for interventions and future implementation of assessment techniques.
This study will also add to the current literature surrounding these assessment tools which could be used in further studies regarding their validity in the CF population.REC name
East of England - Cambridge East Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
19/EE/0098
Date of REC Opinion
28 Mar 2019
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion