Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Feb;15(2):109-119.
doi: 10.1002/alr.23452. Epub 2024 Sep 20.

A cost utility analysis for the management of acute exacerbations of chronic rhinosinusitis

Affiliations

A cost utility analysis for the management of acute exacerbations of chronic rhinosinusitis

Matthew M Chu et al. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2025 Feb.

Abstract

Background: The 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.

Methods: The 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.

Results: Observation 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.

Conclusion: Observation 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.

Keywords: AECRS; acute exacerbations; antibiotics; chronic rhinosinusitis; corticosteroids; cost‐effectiveness; management; treatment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no financial disclosures or conflicts of interests relevant to this manuscript.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Decision tree comparing three different initial strategies for managing patient‐perceived AECRS.

Similar articles

References

    1. Sedaghat AR, Kuan EC, Scadding GK. Epidemiology of chronic rhinosinusitis: prevalence and risk factors. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2022;10(6):1395‐1403. doi:10.1016/j.jaip.2022.01.016 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Speth MM, Hoehle LP, Phillips KM, Caradonna DS, Gray ST, Sedaghat AR. Changes in chronic rhinosinusitis symptoms differentially associate with improvement in general health‐related quality of life. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2018;121(2):195‐199. doi:10.1016/j.anai.2018.05.029 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Phillips KM, Bergmark RW, Hoehle LP, Caradonna DS, Gray ST, Sedaghat AR. Chronic rhinosinusitis exacerbations are differentially associated with lost productivity based on asthma status. Rhinology. 2018;56(4):323‐329. doi:10.4193/Rhin18.033 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rudmik L. Economics of chronic rhinosinusitis. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2017;17(4):20. doi:10.1007/s11882-017-0690-5 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Phillips KM, Hoehle LP, Bergmark RW, Caradonna DS, Gray ST, Sedaghat AR. Acute exacerbations mediate quality of life impairment in chronic rhinosinusitis. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2017;5(2):422‐426. doi:10.1016/j.jaip.2016.09.015 - DOI - PubMed