Search

Objective: To offer pragmatic, evidence-informed advice on administering corticosteroids in otolaryngology during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, considering therapeutic efficacy, potential adverse effects, susceptibility to COVID-19, and potential effects on efficacy of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19. Data Sources: PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL, and guideline databases. Review Methods: Guideline search strategies, supplemented by database searches on sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL), idiopathic facial nerve paralysis (Bell's palsy), sinonasal polyposis, laryngotracheal disorders, head and neck oncology, and pediatric otolaryngology, prioritizing systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and COVID-19–specific findings. Conclusions: Systemic corticosteroids (SCSs) reduce long-term morbidity in individuals with SSNHL and Bell's palsy, reduce acute laryngotracheal edema, and have benefit in perioperative management for some procedures. Topical or locally injected corticosteroids are preferable for most other otolaryngologic indications. SCSs have not shown long-term benefit for sinonasal disorders. SCSs are not a contraindication to vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention noted that these vaccines are safe for immunocompromised patients. Implications for Practice: SCS use for SSNHL, Bell's palsy, laryngotracheal edema, and perioperative care should follow prepandemic standards. Local or topical corticosteroids are preferable for most other otolaryngologic indications. Whether SCSs attenuate response to vaccination against COVID-19 or increase susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection is unknown. Immunosuppression may lower vaccine efficacy, so immunocompromised patients should adhere to recommended infection control practices. COVID-19 vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, or Johnson & Johnson vaccines is safe for immunocompromised patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The coronavirus 2019 pandemic has increased the use of powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) devices, which produce appreciable noise levels during filtration. Our objective was to determine if active PAPR usage significantly impairs auditory communication in health care providers. We additionally sought to assess what volume of speech presentation was required for adequate communication with providers wearing a PAPR. In subjects with normal hearing at baseline, audiometric data demonstrated a 93% (95% CI, 86%-99%) decrease in word recognition scores during active PAPR usage. Presentation at 85 to 90 dB was needed to obtain word recognition scores similar to baseline in subjects with normal hearing without a PAPR. Pure tone averages also significantly decreased with PAPR usage, by 54 dB (95% CI, 46-62). Active PAPR usage has a substantial impact on auditory perception when utilized by health care providers. The potential longer-term effect of these devices on providers with regular active usage is of interest for future study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The overall discriminatory ability of validated instrument scores for computed tomography (CT) findings of chronic rhinosinusitis has limitations and may be modified by multiple factors. To support optimal methods for assessment, we studied which factors could influence this relationship, including the concurrent impact of multiple discrete CT scoring mechanisms, colocalized imaging findings, and nasal comorbid conditions. Study Design: Observational outcomes study. Setting: Academic medical center. Methods: Patients with sinonasal complaints who completed the 22-item Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) and underwent CT were included. Multivariate ordinal regression was utilized to assess associations. CT data were quantified with the Lund-Mackay system, Zinreich system, and a direct measure of maximal mucosal thickness. The impact of incidental findings (mucous retention cysts, periapical dental disease) and nasal comorbid conditions was also assessed. Results: A total of 233 patients were included. SNOT-22 nasal scores were significantly associated with CT results when those with incidental findings were excluded, regardless of the radiologic scoring mechanism utilized: Lund-Mackay regression coefficient, 0.321 (P =.046); Zinreich, 0.340 (P =.033); and maximum mucosal thickness, 0.316 (P =.040). This relationship subsided when incidental findings were present. SNOT-22 overall scores, sleep scores, and psychological domain scores had no significant association with imaging results, regardless of radiologic scoring system utilized. Nasal comorbid conditions had inconsistent associations. Conclusions: SNOT-22 nasal domain scores were associated with all 3 radiologic scoring systems when incidental findings were absent but not when they were present. Delineating the presence or absence of these colocalized findings affected the relationship between SNOT-22 scores and radiological results, beyond other concurrent factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To provide a contemporary resource to update clinicians and researchers on the current state of assessment of patient preferences. Data Sources: Published studies and literature regarding patient preferences, evidence-based practice, and patient-centered management in otolaryngology. Review Methods: Patients make choices based on both physician input and their own preferences. These preferences are informed by personal values and attitudes, and they ideally result from a deliberative evaluation of the risks, benefits, and other outcomes pertaining to medical care. To date, rigorous evaluation of patient preferences for otolaryngologic conditions has not been integrated into clinical practice or research. This installment of the "Evidence-Based Medicine in Otolaryngology" series focuses on formal assessment of patient preferences and the optimal methods to determine them. Conclusions: Methods have been developed to optimize our understanding of patient preferences. Implications for Practice: Understanding these patient preferences may help promote an evidence-based approach to the care of individual patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To provide a resource to educate clinical decision makers about the analyses and models that can be employed to support data-driven choices. Data Sources: Published studies and literature regarding decision analysis, decision trees, and models used to support clinical decisions. Review Methods: Decision models provide insights into the evidence and its implications for those who make choices about clinical care and resource allocation. Decision models are designed to further our understanding and allow exploration of the common problems that we face, with parameters derived from the best available evidence. Analysis of these models demonstrates critical insights and uncertainties surrounding key problems via a readily interpretable yet quantitative format. This 11th installment of the Evidence-Based Medicine in Otolaryngology series thus provides a step-by-step introduction to decision models, their typical framework, and favored approaches to inform data-driven practice for patient-level decisions, as well as comparative assessments of proposed health interventions for larger populations. Conclusions: Information to support decisions may arise from tools such as decision trees, Markov models, microsimulation models, and dynamic transmission models. These data can help guide choices about competing or alternative approaches to health care. Implications for Practice: Methods have been developed to support decisions based on data. Understanding the related techniques may help promote an evidence-based approach to clinical management and policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The 22-item Sinonasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) is a trusted measure of symptom severity in chronic rhinosinusitis. The European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis (EPOS) provides widely accepted diagnostic criteria, which include sinonasal symptoms, their duration, and imaging results. Our objective was to compare these approaches to assessing symptoms to determine if either was more indicative of radiologic findings, to support decisions in telehealth. Study Design: Observational outcomes study. Setting: Tertiary care center. Methods: In total, 162 consecutive patients provided a structured sinonasal history, completed the SNOT-22, and underwent sinus computed tomography (CT) within 1 month. SNOT-22 scores, EPOS-defined symptom sets, and Lund-Mackay results were assessed. To facilitate direct comparisons, we performed stepwise evaluations of sinonasal symptoms alone and combined with duration. The discriminatory capacity for imaging results was determined through areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC-AUC) for dichotomous outcomes and ordinal regression for multilevel outcomes. Results: In ROC-AUC analyses, SNOT-22 and EPOS-defined symptoms had similar discriminatory capacity for Lund-Mackay scores, regardless of duration. Within ordinal regression analyses, SNOT-22 nasal scores were significantly associated with Lund-Mackay scores, while EPOS-defined nasal symptoms were not statistically significantly related. Conclusions: SNOT-22 nasal scores and EPOS-defined nasal symptoms may have similar associations with imaging results when assessed via ROC-AUC, while SNOT-22 may have more association within ordinal data. Understanding the implications of discrete patterns of symptoms may confer benefit, particularly when in-person and fiberoptic exams are limited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: National initiatives and funding agencies may deprioritize voice disorders relative to conditions such as malignancy, pulmonary, or cardiac disease. It is unknown whether the impact of voice problems is outweighed by other potentially more serious disease states. Our objective was thus to quantify the extent to which voice contributes to general health status when adjusting for concurrent, more life-threatening comorbidities.Methods: Adults (n = 430) presenting to a tertiary care academic center with a primary voice complaint completed the Voice Handicap Index-10 (VHI-10) and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System global health short-form instrument (PROMIS). Medical comorbidities were categorized via the Deyo modification of the Charlson Comorbidity Index. The influence of voice and comorbid conditions on general health scores was assessed through multivariate ordinal regression. The potential for effect modification was also evaluated.Results: VHI-10 mean scores were 11.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.5 to 12.4). PROMIS physical and mental health t scores were 49.0 (95% CI, 48.0 to 49.9) and 51.6 (95% CI, 50.6 to 52.5), respectively. Global and social item scores were 3.4 (95% CI, 3.3 to 3.5) and 3.7 (95% CI, 3.6 to 3.8), respectively. The most prevalent comorbid conditions were pulmonary disease, malignancy, and connective tissue disorders. In all analyses, voice handicap was a significant predictor of general health, even when adjusting for comorbid conditions (VHI-10 β = -1.349, P < 0.001 for physical health; β = -1.278, P < 0.001 for mental health; β = -1.691, P < 0.001 for social health; β = -0.956, P < 0.001 for the global overview item).Conclusion: In the observed population, voice health has a significant, multi-dimensional impact on general health, which is not subsumed by the presence of comorbidities.Level Of Evidence: 4 Laryngoscope, 130:2405-2411, 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives/hypothesis: Institutional and national programs have endorsed the use of validated instruments in daily practice, but their utility for frontline clinicians is unknown. Our first objective was thus to determine if routinely obtained patient descriptions accurately predict disease-specific validated instrument results. Our second objective was to assess the feasibility of deploying an electronic system to obtain and document patient-reported descriptions of health status.Study Design: Prospective assessment of consecutive eligible ambulatory care patients.Methods: For the first objective, patients presenting with the same chief complaint at consecutive visits provided concurrent routine symptom descriptions and validated instrument responses. To determine whether patients' routine descriptions predicted scores from disease-specific instruments, receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves, sensitivity/specificity, Spearman ρ correlation, and regression models were utilized. For the second objective, feasibility assessment focused on percent with successful response capture, time to questionnaire completion, and impact on physician time needed to obtain and document patient histories.Results: For the first objective, among patients with hearing loss, eustachian tube dysfunction, nasal obstruction, and chronic rhinosinusitis, the areas under the ROC curves were 0.38 to 0.83. Spearman ρ coefficients were 0.25 to 0.46. Sensitivity and specificity ranged from 15.9% to 87.8%, with correct classification in 42.3% to 55.2% of cases. For the second objective, there was a 91% completion rate. Completion times were 7:18 to 12:37 for new patients and 3:23 to 6:41 for established patients. Physician time savings were estimated at 11 minutes per patient.Conclusions: Using validated instruments and electronic data collection systems in daily practice has practical and clinical implications. These topics warrant further study.Level Of Evidence: 2c Laryngoscope, 130:S1-S13, 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]