Is Ginger Effective in Reducing Post-tonsillectomy Morbidity? A Prospective Randomised Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVES: An assessment of the effects of ginger on pain, nausea, vomiting, bleeding, and wound site healing that occur after tonsillectomy. METHODS: This prospective clinical study was participated by 49 patients aged 18-45 years out of 56 patients that underwent tonsillectomy and regularly attended follow-up visits. The patients were randomly divided into two groups. Group 1 consisted of 23 patients that used ginger capsules and group 2 consisted of 26 patients that did not use ginger capsules in addition to the routine antibiotic and paracetamol treatment following tonsillectomy. The pain, nausea, vomiting, and bleeding scores of patients were assessed on days 1, 4, 7, and 10 by using the visual analogue scale. Similarly, the epithelialization degrees of tonsillar bed were assessed on postoperative days 1, 4, 7, and 10 and regular oral intake times of patients were recorded. RESULTS: There were no differences between groups in terms of age and sex. On the postoperative days 1, 4, 7, and 10, the pain scores were lower in the group 1 (all P<0.001) and there were no differences between the two groups in terms of postoperative nausea, vomiting, and bleeding scores (P=0.35 and P=0.53). On the postoperative days 7 and 10, epithelialization in the tonsil bed was quicker in the group 1 (P=0.041 and P=0.026) and the regular oral intake time was earlier in group 1 (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: In this study, ginger relieved pain, accelerated wound site epithelialization, and decreased duration of oral intake following tonsillectomy. It did not result in postoperative bleeding or any other complications. Ginger can be recommended as an adjunct to routine medical treatment for decreasing morbidity following tonsillectomy.

University of Pennsylvania smell identification test: application to Turkish population.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate whether UPSIT (The University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test) clinical olfactory function test is suitable to assess olfactory function in Turkish population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty healthy Turkish volunteers (21 males, 29 females; mean age 31.5±8.7 years; range 20 to 49 years) who underwent a detailed otorhinolaryngological examination were included in the study. Subjects with abnormal findings suggesting olfactory dysfunction were excluded from the study. UPSIT and Connecticut Chemosensory Clinical Research Center (CCCRC) tests were carried out for each individual separately. RESULTS: Mean CCCRC test score was 6.3±0.6 out of 7. Ten volunteers scored between 5-5.75 were considered mild hyposmia, while 40 volunteers scored between 6-7 were evaluated as normosmic. Volunteers correctly identified 21.4±4.7 odors out of 40 odors in UPSIT test. CONCLUSION: We concluded that UPSIT test is insufficient for the evaluation of olfactory function in Turkish population. Our results suggest that UPSIT test contains odors which are unfamiliar to Turkish population. Therefore, it is essential to either modify odors of UPSIT test or establish normative data suitable to Turkish population for evaluating the scores to avoid false olfactory function assessment.