Premium
Stakeholders’ views of recurrent sore throat, tonsillitis and their management: a qualitative interview study for the NA tional Trial of Tonsillectomy IN Adults ( NATTINA Part 1)
Author(s) -
McSweeney L.A.,
Rousseau N.S.,
Wilson J.A.,
Wilkes S.,
Haighton C.A.
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
clinical otolaryngology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.914
H-Index - 68
eISSN - 1749-4486
pISSN - 1749-4478
DOI - 10.1111/coa.12720
Subject(s) - tonsillectomy , sore throat , medicine , tonsillitis , nose , stakeholder , qualitative research , clinical trial , family medicine , physical therapy , surgery , social science , public relations , sociology , political science
Objectives To determine the impact of recurrent sore throats and tonsillitis in adults and stakeholder views of treatment pathways. Design Qualitative semistructured interview design reporting novel data from a feasibility study for a UK national trial of tonsillectomy in adults. Setting Nine study sites linked to ear, nose and throat departments in National Health Service hospitals located across the United Kingdom. Participants Fifteen patients, 11 general practitioners and 22 ear, nose and throat staff consented to in‐depth interviews, which were analysed using a framework analysis approach. Main outcome measures Views of stakeholder groups. Results Recurrent sore throats were reported to severely impact patients’ family, work and social life. Ear, nose and throat staff stated that patients faced increasing barriers to secondary care service access. General practitioners were under pressure to reduce ‘limited clinical value’ surgical procedures. Conclusions The findings from this study suggest that there is a disconnect between the attitudes of the stakeholders and the reality of recurrent sore throat, tonsillectomy procedures and service provision. More evidence for the role of tonsillectomy is needed from randomised controlled trials to determine whether it should continue to be ranked as a procedure of limited clinical effectiveness.