No abstract

No abstract

Objective: Odontogenic maxillary sinusitis OMS is a common disease. However, no diagnostic criteria or treatment recommendations have been established. Patients are diagnosed and treated by both otorhinolaryngologists and dentists. Knowldege of the methods of both diagnosis and treatment is the first step to a more effective cooperation between otorhinolaryngologists and dentists. This study is a cross-sectional analysis intended to evaluate the differences between the criteria for OMS diagnosis and the treatment methods used by both otorhinolaryngologists and dentists. Method: An online questionnaire about the diagnostic criteria and treatment methods for OMS was sent to both otorhinolaryngologists and dentists. Results: Fifty otorhinolaryngologists and dentists responded. CT was considered as the most reliable modality for OMS diagnosis by % of the otorhinolaryngologists and by % of the dentists. Furthermore, % of the otorhinolaryngologists consulted with dentists about treatment, while only % of the dentists consulted with otorhinolaryngologists. Conclusion: Most otorhinolaryngologists and dentists rely on CT for OMS diagnosis. However, the dentists rely on CT less than the otorhinolaryngologists by a significant amount. Otorhinolaryngologists tend to consult dentists regarding treatment whereas the dentists tend to treat patients without consulting an otorhinolaryngologist.

In Japan, sublingual immunotherapy has been used in pediatric patients with cedar pollinosis and mite-induced perennial allergic rhinitis since its approval in 2018 for national healthcare coverage in children. We conducted a mail-in survey on parents/guardians of children who started sublingual immunotherapy in 2018 to ascertain their concerns in starting sublingual immunotherapy as well as problems and changes in their awareness after starting the therapy. The common concerns in starting sublingual immunotherapy were 1) maintaining daily treatment, 2) long-term continuation, 3) potential of anaphylaxis, and 4) local side effects. More than 60% of the parents/guardians viewed the side effects after starting the therapy as 1) mild or 2) milder than expected for conditions related to both cedar and mites. Half of the parents/guardians responded that their impression has not changed compared with before sublingual immunotherapy. However, approximately 40% of parents/guardians responded that they felt greater relief compared with before the therapy regarding anxieties about 1) anaphylaxis, 2) long-term continuation, 3) local side effects, and 4) maintaining daily treatment.Sublingual immunotherapy is a treatment method that is still not well known. Thus, it is desirable, especially when starting therapy in pediatric patients, for the physician and medical staff to provide a thorough advance explanation to the patients and family on what the therapy entails. Furthermore, we believe it is essential for the healthcare providers to continue answering questions and anxieties that the patient or parent/guardian may have at any time after starting the therapy.

No abstract