Search

KEY POINTS: Patients treated with pembrolizumab experience an increase in paranasal sinus inflammationUse of topical triamcinolone in carboxymethylcellulose is a treatment option for such patients [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To explore challenges and opportunities for supporting midcareer women otolaryngologists in the areas of negotiation and sponsorship. Study Design: Qualitative approach using semistructured interviews. Setting: Online multi‐institutional interviews. Methods: This study was performed from June to August 2021. Women otolaryngologists representing diverse subspecialties, training, and practice environments were recruited via a purposive criterion‐based sampling approach. Semistructured interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed via an inductive‐deductive approach to produce a thematic content analysis. Results: Among the 12 women interviewees, who represented 7 subspecialties, the majority were Caucasian (58%) and in academic practice (50%). The median residency graduation year was 2002 (range, 1982‐2013). Participants expressed several challenges that women otolaryngologists face with respect to negotiation, including the absence of systematic formal negotiation training, gendered expectations that women experience during negotiations, and a perceived lack of power in negotiations. Obstacles to effective sponsorship included difficulty in the identification of sponsors and the influence of gender and related systemic biases that hindered sponsorship opportunities. Conclusion: Notable gender disparities exist for negotiation and sponsorship in the midcareer stage for women otolaryngologists. Women start at a disadvantage due to a lack of negotiation training and access to sponsors, which is exacerbated by systemic gender bias and power differentials as women advance in their careers. This study highlights opportunities to improve negotiation and sponsorship for women, with the goal of promoting a more diverse workforce. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To offer practical, evidence-informed knowledge on clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) and their utility in improving care and reducing costs in otolaryngology–head and neck surgery. This primer on CDSSs introduces clinicians to both the capabilities and the limitations of this technology, reviews the literature on current state, and seeks to spur further progress in this area. Data Sources: PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science. Review Methods: Scoping review of CDSS literature applicable to otolaryngology clinical practice. Investigators identified articles that incorporated knowledge-based computerized CDSSs to aid clinicians in decision making and workflow. Data extraction included level of evidence, Osheroff classification of CDSS intervention type, otolaryngology subspecialty or domain, and impact on provider performance or patient outcomes. Conclusions: Of 3191 studies retrieved, 11 articles met formal inclusion criteria. CDSS interventions included guideline or protocols support (n = 8), forms and templates (n = 5), data presentation aids (n = 2), and reactive alerts, reference information, or order sets (all n = 1); 4 studies had multiple interventions. CDSS studies demonstrated effectiveness across diverse domains, including antibiotic stewardship, cancer survivorship, guideline adherence, data capture, cost reduction, and workflow. Implementing CDSSs often involved collaboration with health information technologists. Implications for Practice: While the published literature on CDSSs in otolaryngology is finite, CDSS interventions are proliferating in clinical practice, with roles in preventing medical errors, streamlining workflows, and improving adherence to best practices for head and neck disorders. Clinicians may collaborate with information technologists and health systems scientists to develop, implement, and investigate the impact of CDSSs in otolaryngology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The process of receiving and scheduling residency interviews for otolaryngology–head and neck surgery positions is chaotic, inducing unnecessary anxiety for applicants and introducing inefficiencies for programs. With incomplete information, applicants often accept all invitations they receive, resulting in interview hoarding and late cancellations. Various specialties have attempted to improve the interview offer and scheduling process through standardization of interview offer dates. In this commentary, we propose that otolaryngology programs adopt a uniform interview offer and scheduling date. We also advise programs commit to limiting the number of interview invitations to the number of interview slots available, and we review best practices to optimize the interview offer and scheduling process for both applicants and programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]