The sino-nasal outcome test (SNOT)-22: validation for Greek patients

Abstract

The aim of this study was to perform translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and validation of the sinonasal outcome test 22 (SNOT-22) in the Greek language. SNOT-22 was translated into Greek. A prospective study was conducted on adult patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) according to rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps (EPOS) criteria. Test-retest evaluation of the patients was carried out. Internal consistency was assessed with Cronbach's alpha test, and test-retest reliability with Pearson's test (parametric correlation coefficient), kappa (reproducibility) and Bland-Altman plot (extent of agreement). Validity was assessed by comparing scores between a control group of volunteers without CRS and the CRS group using Mann-Whitney test. Responsiveness was assessed on CRS patients who underwent surgery, by comparing preoperative to 3 months postoperative scores with paired t test. Furthermore the magnitude of surgery effect was evaluated. Test-retest evaluation was accepted in 64 patients. Cronbach's alpha was 0.84 and 0.89 at test and retest, respectively, suggesting good internal consistency. Pearson's correlation coefficient was 0.91 (p < 0.001), revealing good correlation between initial and retest scores. Mean kappa value was 0.65, indicating a high level of reproducibility, while in Bland-Altman plot the differences were located between agreement thresholds. The control group consisted of 120 volunteers. Mann-Whitney test showed a statistically significant lower score for the control group (p < 0.0001). 32 CRS patients underwent surgical treatment. Postoperative scores were significantly lower than preoperative (p < 0.0001) while the magnitude of surgery effect was considered high. Greek SNOT-22 is a valid instrument with good internal consistency, reliability, reproducibility, validity and responsiveness.

Sino‐Nasal outcome test‐22 outcomes after sinus surgery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…A total of 31 studies were considered to be duplicates from the same cohort, and an additional 53 failed to meet inclusion/exclusion criteria. The final study list included 40 unique patient cohorts published from 2008 to 2016 and representing institutions from North America (n = 14), Europe (n = 12), Middle East (n = 6), Australia (n = 3), Asia (n = 3), and South America (n = 2) . The majority of studies were prospective observational cohorts (n =2 3), with the remainder being surgical arms from randomized clinical trials (n = 7), retrospective cohorts (n = 7), or case‐control studies (n = 3).…”

Twenty‐two–item Sino‐Nasal Outcome Test in a control population: a cross‐sectional study and systematic review

“…Of these, 29 were selected based on title or abstract. After full‐text screening, 13 articles were selected for inclusion in the systematic review and 10 articles were pooled for meta‐analysis. One of the 10 articles was obtained by author correspondence and another was retrieved from the references of 1 of the fully screened texts .…”

Impact of postoperative endoscopy upon clinical outcomes after endoscopic sinus surgery

“…These near perfect CRSsNP patients had a mean SNOT-22 score of 21.6, which was 4 to 5 points worse than non-CRS controls and CRSwNP patients with near perfect endoscopy (Table 7). Previous studies have reported normative data for the SNOT-22 in non-CRS patients with a mean as low as 7 16 , however these studies typically examined medical students or other populations that were not matched for age, gender, co-morbidities and environmental exposures 1718–20 . When we compared our CRS cohort to a matched non-CRS cohort, we found that a “normal” SNOT-22 is approximately 16, thus this should realistically be the goal for our CRS patients, rather than a “perfect” score of 0.…”