Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38204203›Full record

Trial reportHealth technology assessment (Winchester, England)2023

Tonsillectomy compared with conservative management in patients over 16 years with recurrent sore throat: the NATTINA RCT and economic evaluation.

Janet A Wilson, Tony Fouweather, Deborah D Stocken, Tara Homer, Catherine Haighton, Nikki Rousseau, James O'Hara, Luke Vale, Rebecca Wilson, Sonya Carnell and 16 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Health technology assessment (Winchester, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Piloting of a Decision Aid for Recurrent Tonsillitis.Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery · 2025
    Trial
  3. How Does the Morbidity of Sore Throat in Recurrent Tonsillitis Correlate With the Tonsillitis Outcome Inventory-14 (TOI-14)?Clinical otolaryngology : official journal of ENT-UK ; official journal of Netherlands Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology & Cervico-Facial Surgery · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Compliance of Tonsillitis e-Health Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025
    Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

26 authors at 14 institutions in 1 country.

Janet A WilsonPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6416-5870
Tony FouweatherPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2292-0495
Deborah D StockenLeeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8031-1738
Tara HomerPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6664-0671
Catherine HaightonDepartment of Social Work, Education and Community Wellbeing, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8061-0428
Nikki RousseauLeeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8826-3515
James O'HaraEar, Nose and Throat Department, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4096-3296
Luke ValePopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8574-8429
Rebecca WilsonNewcastle Clinical Trials Unit, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7695-4375
Sonya CarnellNewcastle Clinical Trials Unit, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7648-4297
Scott WilkesSchool of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences and Wellbeing, University of Sunderland, Sunderland, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2949-7711
Jill MorrisonSenate Office, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3965-1516
Kim Ah-SeeDepartment of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, NHS Grampian, Aberdeen, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7085-7486
Sean CarrieEar, Nose and Throat Department, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1722-1814
Claire HopkinsEar, Nose and Throat and Head and Neck Department, Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3993-1569
Nicola HoweNewcastle Clinical Trials Unit, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9446-8314
Musheer HussainSchool of Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3169-3087
Lyndsay LindleySocial Policy Research Unit, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5982-9679
Kenneth MacKenzieDepartment of Ear, Nose and Throat Surgery, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2952-7717
Lorraine McSweeneyPopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1044-6201
Hisham MehannaInstitute of Head and Neck Studies and Education, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5544-6224
Christopher RaineEar, Nose and Throat Department, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0839-0878
Ruby Smith WhelanNewcastle Clinical Trials Unit, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4389-8685
Frank SullivanPopulation and Behavioural Science Division, School of Medicine, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6623-4964
Alexander von Wilamowitz-MoellendorffNewcastle Clinical Trials Unit, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8735-1879
Dawn TearePopulation Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3994-0051
Newcastle University · GBNewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Leeds · GBBradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust · GBNHS Grampian · GBNHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde · GBNorthumbria University · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GBUniversity of Dundee · GBUniversity of Glasgow · GBUniversity of St Andrews · GBUniversity of Sunderland · GBUniversity of York · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The place of tonsillectomy in the management of sore throat in adults remains uncertain. Objectives: To establish the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of tonsillectomy, compared with conservative management, for tonsillitis in adults, and to evaluate the impact of alternative sore throat patient pathways. Design: This was a multicentre, randomised controlled trial comparing tonsillectomy with conservative management. The trial included a qualitative process evaluation and an economic evaluation. Setting: The study took place at 27 NHS secondary care hospitals in Great Britain. Participants: A total of 453 eligible participants with recurrent sore throats were recruited to the main trial. Interventions: Patients were randomised on a 1 : 1 basis between tonsil dissection and conservative management (i.e. deferred surgery) using a variable block-stratified design, stratified by (1) centre and (2) severity. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome measure was the total number of sore throat days over 24 months following randomisation. The secondary outcome measures were the number of sore throat episodes and five characteristics from Sore Throat Alert Return, describing severity of the sore throat, use of medications, time away from usual activities and the Short Form questionnaire-12 items. Additional secondary outcomes were the Tonsil Outcome Inventory-14 total and subscales and Short Form questionnaire-12 items 6 monthly. Evaluation of the impact of alternative sore throat patient pathways by observation and statistical modelling of outcomes against baseline severity, as assessed by Tonsil Outcome Inventory-14 score at recruitment. The incremental cost per sore throat day avoided, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained based on responses to the Short Form questionnaire-12 items and the incremental net benefit based on costs and responses to a contingent valuation exercise. A qualitative process evaluation examined acceptability of trial processes and ramdomised arms. Results: There was a median of 27 (interquartile range 12-52) sore throats over the 24-month follow-up. A smaller number of sore throats was reported in the tonsillectomy arm [median 23 (interquartile range 11-46)] than in the conservative management arm [median 30 (interquartile range 14-65)]. On an intention-to-treat basis, there were fewer sore throats in the tonsillectomy arm (incident rate ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.43 to 0.65). Sensitivity analyses confirmed this, as did the secondary outcomes. There were 52 episodes of post-operative haemorrhage reported in 231 participants undergoing tonsillectomy (22.5%). There were 47 re-admissions following tonsillectomy (20.3%), 35 relating to haemorrhage. On average, tonsillectomy was more costly and more effective in terms of both sore throat days avoided and quality-adjusted life-years gained. Tonsillectomy had a 100% probability of being considered cost-effective if the threshold for an additional quality-adjusted life year was £20,000. Tonsillectomy had a 69% probability of having a higher net benefit than conservative management. Trial processes were deemed to be acceptable. Patients who received surgery were unanimous in reporting to be happy to have received it. Limitations: The decliners who provided data tended to have higher Tonsillectomy Outcome Inventory-14 scores than those willing to be randomised implying that patients with a higher burden of tonsillitis symptoms may have declined entry into the trial. Conclusions: The tonsillectomy arm had fewer sore throat days over 24 months than the conservative management arm, and had a high probability of being considered cost-effective over the ranges considered. Further work should focus on when tonsillectomy should be offered. National Trial of Tonsillectomy IN Adults has assessed the effectiveness of tonsillectomy when offered for the current UK threshold of disease burden. Further research is required to define the minimum disease burden at which tonsillectomy becomes clinically effective and cost-effective. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN55284102. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 12/146/06) and is published in full in

Indexed as

PharyngitisTonsillectomyTonsillitisAdultConservative TreatmentCost-Benefit AnalysisHemorrhageHumansADULTSCLINICAL EFFECTIVENESSCONSERVATIVE MANAGEMENTCOST-EFFECTIVENESSQUALITY OF LIFERANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIALSORE THROATTONSILLECTOMYTONSILLITIS

Identifiers

PMID38204203
PMCPMC11017150
OpenAlexW4390757927

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.