Search

Background: Reprocessing of nasopharyngoscopes represents a large financial burden to community physicians. The aim of this study was to perform a cost analysis of nasopharyngoscope reprocessing methods at the community level., Methods: Electronic surveys were distributed by email to community otolaryngologists. Surveys were comprised of 14 questions assessing clinic size, nasopharyngoscope volume, scope reprocessing method and maintenance. Four manual techniques were evaluated: (1) soak with ortho-phthalaldehyde solution (Cidex-OPA; Advanced Sterilization Products, Johnson and Johnson Inc., Markham, Canada), (2) soak with accelerated hydrogen peroxide solution (Revital-Ox; Steris Canada Inc., Mississauga, Canada), (3) disinfection with chlorine dioxide wipe (Tristel Trio Wipes System; Tristel plc., Cambridgeshire, UK), (4) UV-C light system (UV Smart, Delft, The Netherlands). All costs are reported in CAD, and consumable and capital costs for reprocessing methods were obtained from reported vendor prices. Time costs were derived from manufacturer recommendations, the Ontario Medical Association Physician's Guide to Uninsured Services, and the Ontario Nurses Association Collective Agreement. Cost analyses determined the most cost-effective reprocessing method in the community setting. Sensitivity analyses assessed the impact of reprocessing volume and labour costs., Results: Thirty-six (86%) otolaryngologists responded and answered the survey. The cost per reprocessing event for Cidex-OPA, Revital-Ox, Tristel and UV system were $38.59, $26.47, $30.53, and $22.74 respectively when physicians reprocessed their endoscopes themselves. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that Revital-Ox was the least costly option in a low volume, however, the UV system remained the most cost effective in higher volumes. The cost per reprocessing event when done by clinic staff was $5.51, $4.42, $11.23 and $6.21 for Cidex-OPA, Revital-Ox, Tristel and the UV system., Conclusions: The UV light system appears to be the most cost-effective method in high volumes of reprocessing, and Revital-Ox is cheaper in lower volumes and when performed by clinic staff rather than physicians. It is important to consider the anticipated work volume, shared clinic space and number of co-workers prior to choosing a reprocessing method., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objectives/hypothesis: Nasopharyngeal swabs currently remain the gold standard for COVID-19 sample collection. A surge in testing volume has resulted in a large number of health care workers who are unfamiliar with nasal anatomy performing this test, which can lead to improper collection practices culminating in false-negative results and complications. Therefore, we aimed to assess the accuracy and educational potential of a realistic 3D-printed nasal swab simulator to expedite health care workers' skill acquisition., Study Design: Prospective pre-post interventional study., Methods: A nasal swab task trainer (NSTT) was developed to scale from computed tomography data with a deviated septum. Frontline workers at COVID-19 testing sites in Ontario, Canada, were recruited to use the NSTT for nasopharyngeal swab training. Integrated video recording capability allowed participants to self-evaluate procedure accuracy. A five-point Likert scale was collected regarding the NSTT's educational value and procedural fidelity., Results: Sixty-two frontline workers included in the study were primarily registered nurses (52%) or paramedics (16%). Following simulator use, self-assessed accuracy improved in 77% of all participants and 100% of participants who expressed low confidence before training. Ninety-four percent reported that the NSTT provided a complete educational experience, and 82% regarded the system as a more effective training approach than what is currently available. Eighty-one indicated that the simulator should be used at all COVID-19 testing sites, with 77% stating province-wide implementation was warranted., Conclusions: The nasal swab task trainer is an effective educational tool that appears well-suited for improved skill acquisition in COVID-19 testing and may be useful for training other nasal swab applications., Level of Evidence: 3 Laryngoscope, 133:38-42, 2023., (© 2022 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

Introduction: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is common, with a Canadian prevalence of 5%, and associated with significant morbidity. Understandably, CRS impairs workplace productivity but that productivity substantially increases following surgical treatment. CRS with nasal polyps (CRSwNP), the most common type of CRS, is usually treated with a combination of medications and endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). Historically, surgical treatment has only been performed in the operating room at a cost of about $C3500. However, recent studies have shown that a de-escalated procedure, endoscopic polypectomy performed in clinic (EPIC), can provide an improvement in patient symptoms to levels equal to those for ESS. Moreover, EPIC has additional proposed advantages including shorter recovery time, significantly lower cost to the healthcare system and shorter wait time for the patient. There is currently insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about the superiority of polypectomy or ESS for the management of CRSwNP., Methods and Analysis: We designed a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial to evaluate whether EPIC was non-inferior to the current clinical standard, ESS for the treatment of CRSwNP. The primary outcome is the Sinonasal Outcome Test-22 score measured at baseline and at 3 months after surgery. Other outcomes include peak nasal inspiratory flow, quality of life measured by the EuroQoL 5 Dimensions 5 Levels questionnaire and work impairment using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire.We aim to recruit 140 patients from sites across Canada. Participants will be randomly assigned to EPIC or ESS and followed up for 3 months in clinic after the procedure. Additionally, participants will enter a 5-year long-term follow-up period., Ethics and Dissemination: This study was approved by the Ottawa Health Sciences Network Research Ethics Board for all sites in Ontario, Canada (study number CTO0801). Sites located outside of Ontario obtained approval from their local/institutional research ethics board., Trial Registration Number: NCT02975310., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: No literature exists which examines referral preferences to, or the consultation process with, Otolaryngology. In a recent Canadian Medical Association nation-wide survey of General Practitioners and Family Physicians, Otolaryngology was listed as the second-most problematic specialty for referrals. The purpose of this study was to learn about and improve upon the referral process between primary care physicians (PCPs) and Otolaryngology at an academic centre in Southwestern Ontario., Methods: PCPs who actively refer patients to Otolaryngology within the catchment area of Western University were asked to complete a short paper-based questionnaire. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics., Results: A total of 50 PCPs were surveyed. Subspecialty influenced 90.0% of the referrals made. Specialist wait times altered 58.0% of referrals. All PCPs preferred to communicate via fax. Half of those surveyed wanted clinical notes from every encounter. Seventy-four percent of respondents wanted inappropriate referrals forwarded to the proper specialist automatically. Twenty-two percent of those surveyed were satisfied with current wait times. A central referral system was favored by 74% of PCPs., Conclusion: Improvements could help streamline the referral and consultation practices with Otolaryngology in Southwestern Ontario. A central referral system and reduction in the frequency of consultative reports can be considered.

Background: Peritonsillar abscesses (PTA) are a common complication of tonsillitis. Recent global epidemiological data regarding PTAs have demonstrated increasing antimicrobial resistance patterns. No similar studies have been conducted in Canada and no Canadian study has examined the post-discharge course of treated patients., Methods: A prospective observational study of the epidemiology, antibiotic resistance and post-discharge course of patients presenting with a peritonsillar abscess to the Emergency Department in London, Ontario over one year. A follow-up telephone survey was conducted 2-3 weeks after abscess drainage., Results: 60 patients were diagnosed with an abscess, giving an incidence of 12/100,000. 46 patients were enrolled in the study; the average duration of symptoms prior to presentation was 6 days, with 51% treated with antibiotics prior to presentation. Streptococcus pyogenes and Streptococcus anginosus were present in 56% of isolates and of those, 7/23 (32%) of specimens demonstrated resistance to clindamycin. Eight patients were treated with clindamycin and had a culture that was resistant, yet only one had recurrence. Telephone follow-up was possible for 38 patients: 51% of patients reported a return to solid food within 2 days, and 75% reported no pain by 5 days. Resolution of trismus took a week or longer for 51%., Interpretation: Clindamycin resistance was identified in a third of Streptococcus isolates, which should be taken into account when prescribing antibiotics. Routine culture appears unnecessary as patients recover quickly from outpatient drainage and empiric therapy, with less pain than expected, but trismus takes time to resolve.