BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In recent years, the emphasis on medical care has shifted from symptom scores and objective test results to the patient-centered assesment of effect of disease or response to treatment. So, we compared, before and after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS), the relationship between 7 nasal symptom scores and quality of life scores measured with RSDI and the SF-36v2(TM) questionnaires, which have been verified by many articles. SUBJECTS AND METHOD: Subjects were 50 patients diagnosed as chronic sinusitis and who underwent ESS from November 2005 to Oct 2006. Patients filled out two questionnaires and checked a visual analogue scale at admission for surgery, and at 2, 4, 8 and 32 weeks postoperatively. Two questionnaires are the Rhinosinusitis Disability Index (RSDI) questionnaire, the SF-36v2(TM) questionnaire, and the visual analogue scale (VAS) is composed of nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea, postnasal drip, sneezing, cough, headache and facial pain. So, we compared each score of the SF-36v2(TM) (PCS and MCS) and RSDI with symptom scores of VAS. RESULTS: In comparing the scores of the RSDI with the symptom scores of VAS, statistically significant relationship was noted with respect to nasal obstruction, headache, and rhinorrhea continuously. But in comparing the scores of the SF-36v2(TM) (PCS and MCS) with the symptom scores of VAS, no statistically significant relationships was observed. CONCLUSION: With respect to the relationship between the quality of life after ESS and symptom severity, RSDI was found to be more effective than SF-36v2(TM). However, because results showed up differently in the two different kinds of questionnaire, it is important that we should use several different verified questionnaires in order to assess patient-centred response to ESS.
Cough ; Endoscopy ; Equidae ; Facial Pain ; Headache ; Humans ; Nasal Obstruction ; Quality of Life ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Sinusitis ; Sneezing

In preparation for the surge of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), it is crucial to allocate medical resources efficiently for distinguishing people who remain asymptomatic until the end of the disease. Between January 27, 2020, and April 21, 2020, 517 COVID-19 cases from 13 healthcare facilities in Gyeonggi province, Korea, were identified out of which the epidemiologic and clinical information of 66 asymptomatic patients at the time of diagnosis were analyzed retrospectively. An exposure-diagnosis interval within 7 days and abnormal aspartate aminotransferase levels were identified as characteristic symptom development in asymptomatic COVID-19 patients. If asymptomatic patients without these characteristics at the time of diagnosis could be differentiated early, more medical resources could be secured for mild or moderate cases in this COVID-19 surge.