Nasal ObstructionNCT03456115
A New Treatment for Mechanical Nasal Obstruction
A study testing Mechanical nasal dilator in people with Nasal Obstruction, run by Johns Hopkins University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The research team has developed a prototype for an investigational mechanical nasal dilator and the investigators aim to evaluate its efficacy. Specifically, the investigators wish to address the following research questions: 1) How does mechanical nasal obstruction affect patients' lives? The investigators aim to… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Nasal Obstruction
- What is being tested?
- Mechanical nasal dilator
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 36 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Oct 2018to 12 May 2022
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients who have presented to Otolaryngology clinics with complaints of nasal obstruction.
- Patients who have been found to have nasal valve collapse by an Otolaryngologist based on performance of the Cottle maneuver will be invited to participate in the study.
- Patients without evidence of nasal valve collapse, but are willing to participate in the study.
Who cannot join
- History of granulomatosis with polyangiitis, extensive prior sinus or turbinate surgery altering nasal cavity anatomy, pre-existing nasal mucosal injuries or abnormalities
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Assessing Mechanical Nasal Obstruction, a Potential New Treatment Option.
The research team has developed a prototype for an investigational mechanical nasal dilator and the investigators aim to evaluate its efficacy.
Specifically, the investigators wish to address the following research questions: 1) How does mechanical nasal obstruction affect patients' lives? The investigators aim to answer this question with use of validated questionnaires. 2) How do currently available mechanical nasal dilators affect objective and subjective findings related to nasal obstruction? This will be evaluated with objective nasal airflow testing and with modifications to validated questionnaires 3) How does the investigational team's novel device affect these same outcome measures? 4) Do patients find the investigational device subjectively comfortable and efficient?
Read the detailed description
Background:
Restricted nasal breathing is a common complaint among patients presenting to Otolaryngology clinics. In fact, one in eight people experiences some degree of nasal obstruction, or regular difficulty breathing through the nose, which is often the result of a narrowing or collapse of the internal nasal valve. This condition is a daily source of discomfort that reduces productivity and quality of life. Sufferers report shortness of breath throughout the day, difficulty sleeping and habitual snoring, and limited stamina during sports and exercise.
Slight dilation of the nasal passages directly counteracts nasal obstruction and reverses symptoms in 89% of those afflicted. To this end, many patients undergo functional rhinoplasty procedures to surgically widen the nasal passages. However, up to 20% of patients experience unimproved or worsened symptoms postoperatively. Moreover, these surgeries are invasive, requiring autologous grafts taken from the nose, ear, or ribs; and surgeries entail a yearlong recovery period.
Nasal dilators such as Breathe Right strips offer a potential alternative to surgery, as these dilators mechanically expand the nasal passages to effectively relieve obstruction. However, existing products are designed as sleep aids, and customers find them uncomfortable, difficult to use, and too visible to wear in public. Although the mechanism for reversing nasal obstruction is straightforward, surgery is considered the only viable option for those who struggle to breathe during the day.
Engineers from the Johns Hopkins Biomedical Engineering Department, partnered with clinicians from the Johns Hopkins Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, have developed the Schnozzle, a small silicone stent to counteract nasal valve collapse and relieve restricted nasal breathing. The investigators hypothesize that this device will improve symptoms of nasal obstruction and provide patients with a viable alternative to visible non-invasive devices or surgical management. The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility and comfort of this device in comparison to existing commercially available devices.
Recruitment:
Participants will be recruited from patients presenting to Otolaryngology clinics with symptoms of nasal obstruction. The otolaryngologist in clinic will screen these patients for nasal valve collapse as in standard clinical practice. This involves visualizing the nasal cavity through nasal endoscopy and evaluating the nasal valve using Cottle maneuver (applying lateral force to the cheek to open the nasal valve) or the modified Cottle maneuver (using a cotton tip applicator to open the nasal valve from inside the nasal cavity) and evaluating for improvement in nasal obstruction symptoms. Improved nasal airflow during the maneuver suggests nasal valve collapse contributes to restricted nasal airflow.
The clinical Otolaryngologist will counsel participants with nasal valve collapse regarding the various treatment options as in routine clinical practice (management options include to doing nothing, using existing nasal dilator devices, or undergoing surgery). Patients will then be invited to participate in the study, which will involve a study session in which patients are fitted with several nasal dilator devices, instructed in proper care and use, and report on their function and comfort. Additional participants will be recruited from patients who present to clinics with symptoms unrelated to nasal breathing to serve as a control group.
Study design:
If a patient expresses interest in participating, the patient will be introduced to a member of the research team to discuss the study and complete informed consent. All participation is voluntary and participants are able to withdraw from the study at any point. The study participant will be asked to complete a questionnaire, which includes the previously validated Nasal Obstruction and Septoplasty Effectiveness (NOSE) instrument, questions regarding the patient's current treatments, and a ranking of their preferred characteristics of an ideal nasal dilator.
Patients will then be asked to inhale rapidly into an airflow transducer to measure peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF). Following the pre-test survey participants will be fitted with existing nasal dilator products per manufacturer recommendations (Breathe Right strips, Max Air nose cones, Sleep Right dilator, and Nozovent dilator), and the experimental nasal dilators designed by the research team. In this crossover design study participants will be blinded as to which dilators are branded and which are experimental. The order of fitting nasal dilators will be randomized.
After each fitting and use for 5 minutes to adjust to the device and confirm there is no immediate discomfort or irritation, participants will undergo repeat PNIF testing with each device, then will be free to go home and trial the devices. Participants will be given a schedule specifying one device to use for at least one continuous hour per day in a randomized order, while also being blinded as to which device participants will be using (Schnozzle, Breathe Right, Max Air, Sleep Right, Nozovent). The devices will be numbered in a random fashion, for participants to be able to identify which device via the assigned number the devices are scheduled to use. Participants will similarly use the device number when performing any device evaluation. Participants are free to wear the assigned nasal dilator at their leisure, but must log the hours and activities performed while wearing the device (for example, "10am-11am exercising"). Participants are not required to wear a device in public at work or during exercise unless participants feel comfortable doing so. All devices should be worn overnight. If there is any discomfort, irritation, skin breakdown, or epistaxis the participant should stop wearing the device and contact the research team immediately. Each morning, the participant will complete a survey summarizing their experience using the assigned device. Before returning to the clinic for the conclusion of the study, participants may have several days without an assigned device. Participants are free to stop wearing all devices or use any device as participants please as long as it is consistent with proper care and use of the device(s).
After at least five days (one day per device) the participant will return to the office for an exit interview with the study team in regards to their subjective experience with each device. At the end of each trial participants will be asked to fill out a concluding survey regarding the device participants were using. At their exit interview participants will be asked to hand in the survey for each device participants trialed.
- Conditions
- Nasal Obstruction
- Being tested
- Mechanical nasal dilator
- Keywords
- nasal obstruction, nasal valve collapse
- Medical subject headings
- Nasal Obstruction
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Mechanical nasal dilatorDevice
Participants will be asked to trial 5 different mechanical nasal dilators. 4 of which are commercially available and one of which is the investigational device being studied for feasibility. The 4 commercially available nasal dilators include Breathe Right, Max Air, Sleep Right, Nozovent. The fifth device is the study team's investigational device dubbed the Schnozzle.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Mechanical Nasal Dilator | Experimental | All participants will be trialing the 5 devices and reporting their thoughts on comfort, and perception of symptoms of mechanical nasal obstruction by way of survey completion. The devices include 4 commercially available nasal dilators: Breathe Right, Max Air, Sleep Right, Nozovent, and the study team's investigational device dubbed the Schnozzle. Receives: Device: Mechanical nasal dilator |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF)
PNIF will be measured using a PNIF meter. PNIF will be measured without any device in place and once during the fitting of each device. Flow is measured in liters per minute. Minimum value of -50, maximum value of 150 with higher scores indicating improved airflow.
Measured: Prior to device and after fitting each device (Up to 5 minutes)
Secondary outcomes (3)
Change in Nasal Obstruction and Septoplasty Effectiveness Scale (NOSE)
The Nasal Obstruction and Septoplasty Effectiveness Scale (NOSE) aims to quantify symptoms of mechanical nasal obstruction. The NOSE metric has a scoring range go 0-100 with 0 being no symptoms of mechanical nasal obstruction and 100 being severe nasal obstruction.
Each device is trialed for one day, hence the scale will be administered at Baseline and after a 24-hour trial of each of the 5 devices.
Measured: Baseline
Change in Nasal Obstruction and Septoplasty Effectiveness Scale (NOSE)
The Nasal Obstruction and Septoplasty Effectiveness Scale (NOSE) aims to quantify symptoms of mechanical nasal obstruction. The NOSE metric has a scoring range go 0-100 with 0 being no symptoms of mechanical nasal obstruction and 100 being severe nasal obstruction.
Each device is trialed for one day, hence the scale will be administered at Baseline and after a 24-hour trial of each of the 5 devices.
Measured: 24-hour after trial of each device
Device Preference
Participants will be asked to rank their preferred device form 1 (most preferred) to 5 (least preferred). The mean will be reported. Scores range from 1-5, with 1 being the most preferred.
Measured: Up to 5 days
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted7 Mar 2018
- Study start1 Oct 2018
- Primary completion12 May 2022
- Study completion12 May 2022
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Nasal ObstructionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Johns Hopkins UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Model description
- All participants will undergo the same intervention, which is a trial of various internal nasal dilators.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 36 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Johns Hopkins University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Nicholas Rowan, Principal investigator, Johns Hopkins University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03456115
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- IRB00135539
- Status last verified
- Jun 2023
- First submitted
- 13 Feb 2018
- Last updated
- 18 Jul 2023
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Jessen M, Malm L. Definition, prevalence and development of nasal obstruction. Allergy. 1997;52(40 Suppl):3-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.1997.tb04876.x. No abstract available.
PubMed 9353553Bloching MB. Disorders of the nasal valve area. GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2007;6:Doc07. Epub 2008 Mar 14.
PubMed 22073083Miman MC, Deliktas H, Ozturan O, Toplu Y, Akarcay M. Internal nasal valve: revisited with objective facts. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006 Jan;134(1):41-7. doi: 10.1016/j.otohns.2005.08.027.
PubMed 16399179Camacho M, Zaghi S, Certal V, Abdullatif J, Modi R, Sridhara S, Tolisano AM, Chang ET, Cable BB, Capasso R. Predictors of Nasal Obstruction: Quantification and Assessment Using Multiple Grading Scales. Plast Surg Int. 2016;2016:6945297. doi: 10.1155/2016/6945297. Epub 2016 May 16.
PubMed 27293885Khosh MM, Jen A, Honrado C, Pearlman SJ. Nasal valve reconstruction: experience in 53 consecutive patients. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2004 May-Jun;6(3):167-71. doi: 10.1001/archfaci.6.3.167.
PubMed 15148124Kiyohara N, Badger C, Tjoa T, Wong B. A Comparison of Over-the-Counter Mechanical Nasal Dilators: A Systematic Review. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2016 Sep 1;18(5):385-9. doi: 10.1001/jamafacial.2016.0291.
PubMed 27367589Picavet VA, Grietens J, Jorissen M, Hellings PW. Rhinoplasty from a rhinologist's perspective: need for recognition of associated sinonasal conditions. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2012 Nov-Dec;26(6):493-6. doi: 10.2500/ajra.2012.26.3816.
PubMed 23232202Samaha M, Rassouli A. Spreader graft placement in endonasal rhinoplasty: Technique and a review of 100 cases. Plast Surg (Oakv). 2015 Winter;23(4):252-4. doi: 10.4172/plastic-surgery.1000944.
PubMed 26665141Kimbell JS, Frank-Ito DO. Mechanical Nasal Dilators for the Management of Nasal Obstruction. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2016 Sep 1;18(5):389-90. doi: 10.1001/jamafacial.2016.0656. No abstract available.
PubMed 27367256Raudenbush B. Stenting the nasal airway for maximizing inspiratory airflow: internal Max-Air Nose Cones versus external Breathe Right strip. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2011 Jul-Aug;25(4):249-51. doi: 10.2500/ajra.2011.25.3621.
PubMed 21819762
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 18 Jul 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Assessing Mechanical Nasal Obstruction, a Potential New Treatment Option.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03456115
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- IRB00135539
- Conditions
- Nasal Obstruction
- Keywords
- nasal obstruction, nasal valve collapse
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 36 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Johns Hopkins UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Oct 2018 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 12 May 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 12 May 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 7 Mar 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 18 Jul 2023
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The research team has developed a prototype for an investigational mechanical nasal dilator and the investigators aim to evaluate its efficacy.
Specifically, the investigators wish to address the following research questions: 1) How does mechanical nasal obstruction affect patients' lives? The investigators aim to answer this question with use of validated questionnaires. 2) How do currently available mechanical nasal dilators affect objective and subjective findings related to nasal obstruction? This will be evaluated with objective nasal airflow testing and with modifications to validated questionnaires 3) How does the investigational team's novel device affect these same outcome measures? 4) Do patients find the investigational device subjectively comfortable and efficient?
Detailed description
Background:
Restricted nasal breathing is a common complaint among patients presenting to Otolaryngology clinics. In fact, one in eight people experiences some degree of nasal obstruction, or regular difficulty breathing through the nose, which is often the result of a narrowing or collapse of the internal nasal valve. This condition is a daily source of discomfort that reduces productivity and quality of life. Sufferers report shortness of breath throughout the day, difficulty sleeping and habitual snoring, and limited stamina during sports and exercise.
Slight dilation of the nasal passages directly counteracts nasal obstruction and reverses symptoms in 89% of those afflicted. To this end, many patients undergo functional rhinoplasty procedures to surgically widen the nasal passages. However, up to 20% of patients experience unimproved or worsened symptoms postoperatively. Moreover, these surgeries are invasive, requiring autologous grafts taken from the nose, ear, or ribs; and surgeries entail a yearlong recovery period.
Nasal dilators such as Breathe Right strips offer a potential alternative to surgery, as these dilators mechanically expand the nasal passages to effectively relieve obstruction. However, existing products are designed as sleep aids, and customers find them uncomfortable, difficult to use, and too visible to wear in public. Although the mechanism for reversing nasal obstruction is straightforward, surgery is considered the only viable option for those who struggle to breathe during the day.
Engineers from the Johns Hopkins Biomedical Engineering Department, partnered with clinicians from the Johns Hopkins Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, have developed the Schnozzle, a small silicone stent to counteract nasal valve collapse and relieve restricted nasal breathing. The investigators hypothesize that this device will improve symptoms of nasal obstruction and provide patients with a viable alternative to visible non-invasive devices or surgical management. The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility and comfort of this device in comparison to existing commercially available devices.
Recruitment:
Participants will be recruited from patients presenting to Otolaryngology clinics with symptoms of nasal obstruction. The otolaryngologist in clinic will screen these patients for nasal valve collapse as in standard clinical practice. This involves visualizing the nasal cavity through nasal endoscopy and evaluating the nasal valve using Cottle maneuver (applying lateral force to the cheek to open the nasal valve) or the modified Cottle maneuver (using a cotton tip applicator to open the nasal valve from inside the nasal cavity) and evaluating for improvement in nasal obstruction symptoms. Improved nasal airflow during the maneuver suggests nasal valve collapse contributes to restricted nasal airflow.
The clinical Otolaryngologist will counsel participants with nasal valve collapse regarding the various treatment options as in routine clinical practice (management options include to doing nothing, using existing nasal dilator devices, or undergoing surgery). Patients will then be invited to participate in the study, which will involve a study session in which patients are fitted with several nasal dilator devices, instructed in proper care and use, and report on their function and comfort. Additional participants will be recruited from patients who present to clinics with symptoms unrelated to nasal breathing to serve as a control group.
Study design:
If a patient expresses interest in participating, the patient will be introduced to a member of the research team to discuss the study and complete informed consent. All participation is voluntary and participants are able to withdraw from the study at any point. The study participant will be asked to complete a questionnaire, which includes the previously validated Nasal Obstruction and Septoplasty Effectiveness (NOSE) instrument, questions regarding the patient's current treatments, and a ranking of their preferred characteristics of an ideal nasal dilator.
Patients will then be asked to inhale rapidly into an airflow transducer to measure peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF). Following the pre-test survey participants will be fitted with existing nasal dilator products per manufacturer recommendations (Breathe Right strips, Max Air nose cones, Sleep Right dilator, and Nozovent dilator), and the experimental nasal dilators designed by the research team. In this crossover design study participants will be blinded as to which dilators are branded and which are experimental. The order of fitting nasal dilators will be randomized.
After each fitting and use for 5 minutes to adjust to the device and confirm there is no immediate discomfort or irritation, participants will undergo repeat PNIF testing with each device, then will be free to go home and trial the devices. Participants will be given a schedule specifying one device to use for at least one continuous hour per day in a randomized order, while also being blinded as to which device participants will be using (Schnozzle, Breathe Right, Max Air, Sleep Right, Nozovent). The devices will be numbered in a random fashion, for participants to be able to identify which device via the assigned number the devices are scheduled to use. Participants will similarly use the device number when performing any device evaluation. Participants are free to wear the assigned nasal dilator at their leisure, but must log the hours and activities performed while wearing the device (for example, "10am-11am exercising"). Participants are not required to wear a device in public at work or during exercise unless participants feel comfortable doing so. All devices should be worn overnight. If there is any discomfort, irritation, skin breakdown, or epistaxis the participant should stop wearing the device and contact the research team immediately. Each morning, the participant will complete a survey summarizing their experience using the assigned device. Before returning to the clinic for the conclusion of the study, participants may have several days without an assigned device. Participants are free to stop wearing all devices or use any device as participants please as long as it is consistent with proper care and use of the device(s).
After at least five days (one day per device) the participant will return to the office for an exit interview with the study team in regards to their subjective experience with each device. At the end of each trial participants will be asked to fill out a concluding survey regarding the device participants were using. At their exit interview participants will be asked to hand in the survey for each device participants trialed.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
- Model description
- All participants will undergo the same intervention, which is a trial of various internal nasal dilators.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Mechanical Nasal Dilator | Experimental | Device: Mechanical nasal dilatorAll participants will be trialing the 5 devices and reporting their thoughts on comfort, and perception of symptoms of mechanical nasal obstruction by way of survey completion. The devices include 4 commercially available nasal dilators: Breathe Right, Max Air, Sleep Right, Nozovent, and the study team's investigational device dubbed the Schnozzle. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Patients who have presented to Otolaryngology clinics with complaints of nasal obstruction.
- Patients who have been found to have nasal valve collapse by an Otolaryngologist based on performance of the Cottle maneuver will be invited to participate in the study.
- Patients without evidence of nasal valve collapse, but are willing to participate in the study.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- History of granulomatosis with polyangiitis, extensive prior sinus or turbinate surgery altering nasal cavity anatomy, pre-existing nasal mucosal injuries or abnormalities
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Mechanical nasal dilatorParticipants will be asked to trial 5 different mechanical nasal dilators. 4 of which are commercially available and one of which is the investigational device being studied for feasibility. The 4 commercially available nasal dilators include Breathe Right, Max Air, Sleep Right, Nozovent. The fifth device is the study team's investigational device dubbed the Schnozzle. | Device | Mechanical Nasal Dilator |
Primary outcome
Change in Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF)
Time frame: Prior to device and after fitting each device (Up to 5 minutes)
PNIF will be measured using a PNIF meter. PNIF will be measured without any device in place and once during the fitting of each device. Flow is measured in liters per minute. Minimum value of -50, maximum value of 150 with higher scores indicating improved airflow.
3 secondary outcomes
Change in Nasal Obstruction and Septoplasty Effectiveness Scale (NOSE)
Time frame: Baseline
Change in Nasal Obstruction and Septoplasty Effectiveness Scale (NOSE)
Time frame: 24-hour after trial of each device
Device Preference
Time frame: Up to 5 days
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 18 Jul 2023.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 9353553Jessen M, Malm L. Definition, prevalence and development of nasal obstruction. Allergy. 1997;52(40 Suppl):3-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.1997.tb04876.x. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 22073083Bloching MB. Disorders of the nasal valve area. GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2007;6:Doc07. Epub 2008 Mar 14.
- Background: PubMed 16399179Miman MC, Deliktas H, Ozturan O, Toplu Y, Akarcay M. Internal nasal valve: revisited with objective facts. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2006 Jan;134(1):41-7. doi: 10.1016/j.otohns.2005.08.027.
- Background: PubMed 27293885Camacho M, Zaghi S, Certal V, Abdullatif J, Modi R, Sridhara S, Tolisano AM, Chang ET, Cable BB, Capasso R. Predictors of Nasal Obstruction: Quantification and Assessment Using Multiple Grading Scales. Plast Surg Int. 2016;2016:6945297. doi: 10.1155/2016/6945297. Epub 2016 May 16.
- Background: PubMed 15148124Khosh MM, Jen A, Honrado C, Pearlman SJ. Nasal valve reconstruction: experience in 53 consecutive patients. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2004 May-Jun;6(3):167-71. doi: 10.1001/archfaci.6.3.167.
- Background: PubMed 27367589Kiyohara N, Badger C, Tjoa T, Wong B. A Comparison of Over-the-Counter Mechanical Nasal Dilators: A Systematic Review. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2016 Sep 1;18(5):385-9. doi: 10.1001/jamafacial.2016.0291.
- Background: PubMed 23232202Picavet VA, Grietens J, Jorissen M, Hellings PW. Rhinoplasty from a rhinologist's perspective: need for recognition of associated sinonasal conditions. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2012 Nov-Dec;26(6):493-6. doi: 10.2500/ajra.2012.26.3816.
- Background: PubMed 26665141Samaha M, Rassouli A. Spreader graft placement in endonasal rhinoplasty: Technique and a review of 100 cases. Plast Surg (Oakv). 2015 Winter;23(4):252-4. doi: 10.4172/plastic-surgery.1000944.
- Background: PubMed 27367256Kimbell JS, Frank-Ito DO. Mechanical Nasal Dilators for the Management of Nasal Obstruction. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2016 Sep 1;18(5):389-90. doi: 10.1001/jamafacial.2016.0656. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 21819762Raudenbush B. Stenting the nasal airway for maximizing inspiratory airflow: internal Max-Air Nose Cones versus external Breathe Right strip. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2011 Jul-Aug;25(4):249-51. doi: 10.2500/ajra.2011.25.3621.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Nasal Obstruction
Recruiting
Measuring Nasal Airway Changes After VivAer Treatment Using AI Analysis
Nasal Airway Obstruction
Active, not recruitingObservational study
A Prospective Study Comparing VivAer to Alternative Surgical Procedures to Treat Nasal Airway Obstruction in Patients With Nasal Valve Dysfunction.
Nasal Airway Obstruction
Recruiting
Post-Market Clinical Study to Evaluate the Safety and Effectiveness of REFLEX ULTRA 45 for Coblation Inferior Turbinate Reduction in China
Nasal Obstruction Due to Inferior Turbinate Hypertrophy
Not yet recruiting
Pharyngeal Mucosal Conditioning to Prevent Postoperative Sore Throat in Septoplasty Patients With Severe Nasal Obstruction
Postoperative Sore Throat, Nasal Obstruction
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Post-market Clinical Follow-up Study of an Isotonic Saline Solution for the Relief of Nasal Congestion in Infants and Toddlers
Nasal Congestion, Common Cold
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Nicholas Rowan principal investigator
Johns Hopkins University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Mechanical nasal dilator in people with Nasal Obstruction, run by Johns Hopkins University at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 18 Jul 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 18 Jul 2023). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in Peak Nasal Inspiratory Flow (PNIF) (time frame: Prior to device and after fitting each device (Up to 5 minutes)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03456115, which also lists 10 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 18 Jul 2023; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 31 Oct 2026.