Editorials

Rhinosinusitis: What Is the Desired Outcome?



FREE PREVIEW Log in or buy this issue to read the full article. AAFP members and paid subscribers get free access to all articles. Subscribe now.


FREE PREVIEW Subscribe or buy this issue. AAFP members and paid subscribers get free access to all articles.

Am Fam Physician. 2004 Nov 1;70(9):1642-1645.

  Related Article

Antibiotics are no longer first-line treatment for many upper respiratory tract infections. Currently, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Physicians are promoting new guidelines for treatment of acute otitis media, proposing that antibiotics not always be used.1,2 Similarly, acute bronchitis, which in the past was almost always treated with antibiotics, is now recognized as a viral disease that generally should be treated with only supportive methods.3

In this issue, Scheid and Hamm present two excellent articles on acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS).4,5 They correctly state that most patients with upper respiratory infections do not have ABRS but, instead, have viral sinusitis. The question is, how should physicians manage this condition? At this time, physicians are still prescribing antibiotics for most patients whom they diagnose with sinusitis.

As described in Scheid and Hamm’s articles, there are numerous methodologically rigorous clinical prediction rules that physicians may use for guidance when examining patients. The problem with these guidelines is that they are drawn from studies of patients in subspecialty clinics, and they measure disease-oriented findings documented by sinus radiographs, computed tomography, and bacterial growth from sinus puncture. What family physicians and patients truly need to provide guidance is practical or pragmatic clinical trials that test prediction rules under clinical conditions similar to what actually occurs in the primary care outpatient setting.6

During the office visit, the problem family physicians face is deciphering which patients will benefit from antibiotics and which ones have viral infections and need only symptomatic treatment. Any treatment ultimately is based on the precept of doing more good than harm. Family physicians are familiar with this struggle because it is at the root of what they do every day while treating patients, but for some reason this strategy has not been applied consistently in the treatment of upper respiratory infections.

If our goal in treating ABRS was to prevent serious complications, such as brain abscesses, then we would be willing to treat many patients unnecessarily to prevent even one brain abscess. Scheid and Hamm never mention such unlikely complications, and I applaud them for this. This omission on their part implicitly tells the reader that this is not the true worry of patients and physicians—that, generally, symptomatic improvement is the true goal of treatment in patients with ABRS. If our goal is to cure something as common and self-limited as purulent nasal discharge, we may not be willing to treat as many patients to help one because we know that antibiotics will help very few of them and that nearly two thirds of patients will continue having symptoms such as cough and nasal discharge for up to three weeks.7

In conjunction with our patients, we need to decide (1) what our goals are when we encounter patients with sinusitis-like symptoms and (2) why we continue to treat these patients with antibiotics if that treatment does not accomplish our goals. Patient-oriented clinical trials still are needed to identify a subset of patients that are likely to benefit from antibiotic treatment. Meanwhile, it is likely that physicians soon will approach the treatment of ABRS in a fashion similar to that of acute otitis media and bronchitis, and that antibiotics will no longer be the first-line treatment option.

The Author

DAN MERENSTEIN, M.D., is Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholar at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.

Address correspondence to Dan Merenstein, M.D., Fellow, Dept. of Medicine, Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program, 600 N. Wolfe St., Carnegie 291, Baltimore, MD 21287-6220 (e-mail: dmerenstein@jhu.edu). Reprints are not available from the author.

REFERENCES

1. American Academy of Pediatrics Subcommittee on Management of Acute Otitis Media. Diagnosis and management of acute otitis media. Pediatrics. 2004;113:1451–65.

2. Neff MJ. AAP, AAFP release guideline on diagnosis and management of acute otitis media. Am Fam Physician. 2004;69:2713–5.

3. Snow V, Mottur-Pilson C, Gonzales R. Principles of appropriate antibiotic use for treatment of acute bronchitis in adults. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:518–20.

4. Scheid DC, Hamm RM. Evaluation of suspected acute bacterial rhinosinusitis in adults: part I. Am Fam Physician. 2004;70:1685–92.

5. Scheid DC, Hamm RM. Evaluation of suspected acute bacterial rhinosinusitis in adults: part II. Am Fam Physician. 2004;70:1697–704.1711–12.

6. Tunis SR, Stryer DB, Clancy CM. Practical clinical trials: increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. JAMA. 2003;290:1624–32.

7. Scott J, Orzano AJ. Evaluation and treatment of the patient with acute undifferentiated respiratory tract infection. J Fam Pract. 2001;50:1070–7.


Copyright © 2004 by the American Academy of Family Physicians.
This content is owned by the AAFP. A person viewing it online may make one printout of the material and may use that printout only for his or her personal, non-commercial reference. This material may not otherwise be downloaded, copied, printed, stored, transmitted or reproduced in any medium, whether now known or later invented, except as authorized in writing by the AAFP. Contact afpserv@aafp.org for copyright questions and/or permission requests.

Want to use this article elsewhere? Get Permissions


Article Tools

  • Print page
  • Share this page
  • AFP CME Quiz

Information From Industry

More in Pubmed

Navigate this Article