Determinants of the microbiome spatial variability in chronic rhinosinusitis.

BACKGROUND: The sinus microbiome in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is considered homogenous across the sinonasal cavity. The middle nasal meatus is the recommended sampling site for 16S rRNA sequencing. However, individuals with unusually high between-site variability between the middle meatus and the sinuses were identified in previous studies. This study aimed to identify which factors determine increased microbial heterogeneity between sampling sites in the sinuses. METHODOLOGY: In this cross-sectional study samples for 16S rRNA sequencing were obtained from the middle meatus, the maxillary and the frontal sinus in 50 patients with CRS. The microbiome diversity between sampling sites was analysed in relation to the size of the sinus ostia and clinical metadata. RESULTS: In approximately 15% of study participants, the differences between sampling sites within one patient were greater than between the patient and other individuals. Contrary to a popular hypothesis, obstruction of the sinus ostium resulted in decreased dissimilarity between the sinus and the middle meatus. The dissimilarity between the sampling sites was patient-specific: greater between-sinus differences were associated with greater meatus-sinus differences, regardless of the drainage pathway patency. Decreased spatial variability was observed in patients with nasal polyps and extensive mucosal changes in the sinuses. CONCLUSIONS: Sampling from the middle meatus is not universally representative of the sinus microbiome. The differences between sites cannot be predicted from the patency of communication pathways between them.

The DrivingHealth® Inventory as a clinical screening tool-assessment of face validity and acceptance.

To investigate the use and potential for patient acceptance of the DrivingHealth(®) Inventory (DHI) in clinical practice, we administered the DHI to 360 community dwelling volunteers over age 50 at a Southeastern US rehabilitation hospital. Volunteers also completed surveys to document their health, driving habits, and impressions of the DHI. Volunteers reported strong agreement with statements that indicated that they believe the DHI measures abilities important for safe driving and that they would be willing to listen to advice about driving and safe mobility from medical professionals; however, responses to some items were more positive among drivers whose DHI results indicated no apparent loss of function that could impair driving. These results support the use of the DHI in clinical practice as a tool to raise awareness of factors that correlate to driving; however, further research will be necessary to investigate how the DHI may benefit diverse clinical populations. Experiences with using DHI as part of clinical practice are also discussed.