BackgroundThe management of acute exacerbations of chronic rhinosinusitis (AECRS) is understudied and the most cost‐effective management of AECRS has not been previously investigated. The aim of this study is to determine the most cost‐effective strategy for the initial management of AECRS.MethodsThe study design consisted of a decision‐tree economic model comparing three different initial strategies for managing a patient perceived AECRS: observation, upfront rescue medications, or clinic visit with diagnostic nasal endoscopy (DNE). The primary study outcome was the disease burden of a single AECRS, which was determined by the health utility value and the duration of symptoms. Strategies with an incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio < $50,000/quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) or equivalently < $137/quality‐adjusted life day (QALD) were considered cost‐effective.ResultsObservation was the most cost‐effective strategy at a willingness to pay of $137 per QALD. One‐way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that observation was more effective than upfront rescue medications when the probability of bacterial infection as the cause of AECRS was <24.0%. Upfront rescue medications wer more cost effective than observation when the probability of bacterial infection exceeded 49.0%. Clinic visit with DNE was the most effective strategy to manage an AECRS, but it was not considered cost‐effective.ConclusionObservation is the most cost‐effective strategy for the initial management of AECRS when there is a low likelihood of bacterial infection. When the probability of bacterial etiology of AECRS exceeds 49.0%, upfront rescue medications proved to be the most cost‐effective strategy.