ABSTRACT
Background: COVID-19 measures such as masking, social distancing, and staying indoors may mitigate chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) symptoms. We evaluate whether these measures correlated with improved symptoms in patients with CRS. Methods: This retrospective study compared SNOT-22 survey data from the Northwestern CRS Registry at the time of enrollment and at years 1-5 of follow-up. The final sample consisted of 1826 SNOT-22 surveys for 598 patients. April 10, 2020 to December 31, 2021 was considered "during the pandemic" and prior to March 11, 2020 was considered "pre-pandemic." Wilcoxon test was used to compare SNOT22 at enrollment pre-pandemic versus during pandemic. Separate linear mixed models were performed to estimate SNOT22 at 1 to 5 years after enrollment pre-pandemic versus during pandemic. Results: Subjects enrolled during the pandemic had worse SNOT22 scores than those enrolled pre-pandemic (53 vs. 42, p = .0024). Total SNOT-22 scores were improved during the pandemic than before the pandemic at 1 year follow-up (18.17 vs. 12.22, p = .001). This effect persists when evaluating the nasal (7.33 vs. 5.13, p = .003), sleep (2.63 vs. 1.39, p = .008), function (1.40 vs. 0.72, p = .015), and emotion (0.77 vs. 0.17, p < .001) domains individually. There was no statistically significant difference in total SNOT-22 score at Years 2-5 of follow-up. Conclusions: Patients with CRS experience a greater reduction in symptom severity in their first year of treatment during the pandemic than before the pandemic, plausibly from measures such as masking and staying indoors. Level of Evidence: 4.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utility of point-of-care COVID-19 testing for identifying infected patients in an otolaryngology practice. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of 947 patients tested with a point-of-care nucleic acid amplification test for SARS-CoV-2 (Abbott ID Now). SETTING: Tertiary otolaryngology clinic setting from July to November 2020. METHODS: Tests were characterized by provider-specified indication (symptomatic, preprocedural, and universal), subspecialty, provider type, and contemporaneous regional COVID-19 positivity rate, defined as 12%. Positive results were further classified as true or false positive (TP or FP) based on repeat polymerase chain reaction testing wherever available, and true positivity rates were compared among groups by multiway chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. FP rates within 48 hours of a TP result were also evaluated to assess for batch contamination. RESULTS: A total of 947 SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification tests were performed, yielding 9 TPs (0.95%) and 5 FPs (0.53%). TP rates were significantly different by testing indication, with higher rates among symptomatic patients (P = .012; vs universal, odds ratio = 7.86 [95% CI, 1.27-83.52]; vs preprocedural, odds ratio = 4.91 [95% CI, 0.79-52.17]); by subspecialty (P = .011), as driven by higher positivity rates in laryngology; and by encounter, with higher rates among advanced practice practitioners than physicians (P = .002; odds ratio = 9.97 [95% CI, 2.11-51.16]). TP rates were not significantly different during periods of uncontrolled local outbreak (P = .660). FP rates were not significantly higher within a 48-hour window of a TP (P = .192). CONCLUSION: Point-of-care COVID-19 nucleic acid amplification tests in an outpatient otolaryngology clinic identified a low TP rate (<1%) with most cases being clinically suspected. Laryngology and advanced practice practitioner encounters may have higher positivity rates.Level of evidence: 3.