ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Vocal fold atrophy and scar can lead to loss of normal superficial lamina propria, negatively affecting the vibratory function of the vocal fold. These changes can lead to dysphonia, vocal fatigue, decreased volume, and altered pitch. Treatment options for these conditions are limited. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) consists of platelets, growth factors, and cytokines derived from the patient's own blood and is believed to activate tissue regeneration. The purpose of this study was to review the technical aspects of collecting PRP and injecting it into the vocal fold injection - based on our initial experience with this procedure. CASE: A patient with vocal fold scar was identified and enrolled in an ongoing prospective clinical trial study of a series of 4 monthly subepithelial vocal fold PRP injections, which was temporarily halted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Patient underwent a single injection of autologous PRP into the left vocal fold. There were no adverse events during the study period. Subjective improvement in voice was noted at 1 month after injection with subsequent return to baseline over the next 4 months. Videostroboscopy performed on postinjection day 1 and day 7 and demonstrated no concerning exam changes. Compared to the preinjection baseline, the patient-reported voice-handicap index-10 (VHI-10) and voice catastrophization index were similar at 4 months following injection (20 to 20 and 4 to 3, respectively). Independent perceptual analysis of voice showed improvement at 4 months postinjection, compared to baseline consensus auditory-perceptual evaluation of voice 60 to 44. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary report was part of a prospective trial investigating the use of PRP to treat vocal fold atrophy and scar. This work highlights the technical considerations for injecting PRP into the vocal fold. Planned prospective enrollment in this study will help to validate the safety and efficacy of PRP injections.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Investigate the effect of a targeted wellness program on burnout in Otolaryngology residents. METHODS: Residents and faculty collaboratively developed a program aimed at improving resident wellness. Program implementation began in July of 2018 and after 1 year, residents evaluated the program's effects on burnout. We used the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) and a Likert scale to evaluate the effects of the program. RESULTS: After 1 year of the resident wellness program, the MBI results showed an increase in the number of residents in the "engaged" category and a decrease in those rated as "burnout." Residents rated favorably initiatives grouped into the following themes: time away from work, faculty engaging with residents outside of the hospital environment, efforts to enhance residents' self-efficacy, fostering a positive culture among residents, and providing easy access to physical activity. The majority of initiatives were targeted to the "culture of wellness" domain, as defined by the Stanford Well MD framework. Our program targeted to a lesser extent the other 2 domains, "efficiency of practice" and "personal resilience." CONCLUSION: After 1 year, the wellness program resulted in a trend toward improving burnout. Future efforts should be focused on targeting the multidimensional drivers of burnout as defined by established wellness frameworks. Realizing new stressors brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic will also be an area of active effort and research.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted via respiratory particles. Respiratory particle emission is impacted by manner of breathing and voicing, as well as intersubject variability. Assessment and treatment of voice disorders may include tasks that increase respiratory particle emission beyond typical breathing and speaking. This could increase the risk of disease transmission via respiratory particles. METHODS: Respiratory particle emission was measured during a single-subject, repeated measures clinical simulation of acoustic and aerodynamic assessment and voice therapy tasks. An optical particle sizer was used to measure particle count (1-10 µm in diameter). Assessment and therapy tasks were completed in three conditions: (1) 15 cm from the device, (2) 1 m from the device, and (3) 1 m from the device with the subject wearing a surgical mask. RESULTS: Condition 1 generated the highest particle count, with a median of 5.1 (13) additional particles above baseline, which was statistically significant (U = 381.5, P= 0.002). In condition 1, therapy and acoustic tasks combined produced more particles compared to the baseline and speech tasks, with a median difference of 6.5 additional particles per time point (U = 309.0, P= 0.002). This difference was not significant for conditions 2 and 3. Peak particle generation occurred in specific phonatory tasks, which was most pronounced in condition 1. Voice therapy tasks during condition 1 generated the highest peaks of normalized total particles with classical singing and expiratory muscle strength training. There was a significant difference in the amount of particle generation between condition 1 and 2, with a median difference of 5.2 particles (U = 461.0, P= 0.002). The particle count difference between conditions 2 and 3 was 2.1 (U = 282.0, P= 0.292), and this difference was not significant. The normalized total particles were assessed over time for each condition. For all conditions, there was no significant accumulation of particles. CONCLUSIONS: For a single subject, production of voice assessment and therapy tasks combined resulted in an increased number of respiratory particles compared to speech and baseline (1-10 µm). EMST and classical singing generated the greatest concentration of particles. Respiratory particle counts were higher at 15 cm from the particle sizer compared to 1 m from the particle sizer, suggesting that physical distancing may reduce immediate clinician exposure to respiratory particles. Particle concentration did not accumulate over time.