Same-Day Patient Consultation and Cochlear Implantation: Patient Experiences and Barriers to Implementation.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the efficacy of same-day cochlear implant (SDCI) evaluation and surgery in improving patient experience. PATIENTS: Adult CI candidates participated in this study. INTERVENTIONS: Education materials and communication with providers were offered via telephone, e-mail, and/or telemedicine. Patients then arrived for in-person consultation, imaging studies, and outpatient CI surgery in one visit and received a 3-month postoperative survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Preoperative hearing, referral-to-surgery time, travel burden, and patient satisfaction were included as outcome measures. RESULTS: Of 35 patients who qualified, 14 were successfully contacted regarding the same-day program: 9 underwent CI, 1 enrolled but did not ultimately meet candidacy criteria, and 4 declined because of coronavirus and/or active medical conditions and did not pursue a CI. For the nine patients who underwent SDCI, mean age was 78 years, and mean preoperative consonant-nucleus-consonant score was 16% in the implanted ear. Mean referral-to-surgery time was 103 days and, after accounting for cancellations because of coronavirus, was 52 days. Mean travel distance to institution was 234 miles. Of the seven patients who completed the follow-up survey, none felt rushed for surgery, and mean program experience was rated 8.6 out of 10. Net promoter score was positive (+72), supporting high experience favorability among patients. Barriers to program expansion included patient recruitment and education, surgery scheduling, and the coronavirus pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: No patients declined the SDCI program to pursue traditional CI evaluation, and all patients were satisfied with their experience. The SDCI program is a feasible and successful model that overcomes barriers to implantation, including travel burden, and improves access to care.

Impact of COVID-19 on presentation, staging, and treatment of head and neck mucosal squamous cell carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: During the COVID-19 pandemic, maintenance of safe and timely oncologic care has been challenging. The goal of this study is to compare presenting symptoms, staging, and treatment of head and neck mucosal squamous cell carcinoma during the pandemic with an analogous timeframe one year prior. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective cohort study at a single tertiary academic center of new adult patients evaluated in a head and neck surgical oncology clinic from March -July 2019 (pre-pandemic control) and March - July 2020 (COVID-19 pandemic). RESULTS: During the pandemic, the proportion of patients with newly diagnosed malignancies increased by 5%, while the overall number of new patients decreased (n = 575) compared to the control year (n = 776). For patients with mucosal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), median time from referral to initial clinic visit decreased from 11 days (2019) to 8 days (2020) (p = 0.0031). There was no significant difference in total number (p = 0.914) or duration (p = 0.872) of symptoms. During the pandemic, patients were more likely to present with regional nodal metastases (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.846, 95% CI 1.072-3.219, p = 0.028) and more advanced clinical nodal (N) staging (p = 0.011). No significant difference was seen for clinical tumor (T) (p = 0.502) or metastasis (M) staging (p = 0.278). No significant difference in pathologic T (p = 0.665), or N staging (p = 0.907) was found between the two periods. CONCLUSION: Head and neck mucosal SCC patients presented with more advanced clinical nodal disease during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic despite no change in presenting symptoms.

The Digital Dilemma: Perspectives From Otolaryngology Residency Applicants on Social Media.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of otolaryngology programs' social media on residency candidates in the 2020 to 2021 application cycle. METHODS: An anonymous survey was distributed via Otomatch, Headmirror, and word of mouth to otolaryngology residency applicants in the 2021 Match. Survey items included demographics, social media usage, and impact of programs' social media on applicant perception and ranking. Descriptive statistics were performed, and responses based on demographic variables were compared using Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: Of 64 included respondents, nearly all (61/64, 95%) used Facebook, Instagram, and/or Twitter for personal and/or professional purposes. Applicants (59/64, 92%) most commonly researched otolaryngology residency programs on Instagram (55/59, 93%) and Twitter (36/59, 61%), with younger (P = .023) and female (P = .043) applicants being more likely to engage with programs on Instagram. Program accounts were most helpful in showcasing program culture (50/59, 85%) and highlighting its location (34/59, 58%). Nearly one third (19/59, 32%) reported that social media impacted their rank list. Age, gender, reapplication, home program status, or time taken off before and/or during medical school did not significantly influence social media's usefulness in the application cycle. CONCLUSION: Social media platforms like Instagram and Twitter are frequently used by applicants to assess otolaryngology residency programs. Programs' social media accounts effectively demonstrate program culture and affect applicants' rank lists. As social media usage continues to rise in the medical community, these findings can help otolaryngology residency programs craft a beneficial online presence that aids in recruitment, networking, and education.

Otolaryngology Residency Program Rankings and Social Media Usage: A Longitudinal Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Social media is a powerful networking tool among health care organizations. This study determines correlations between program reputation and social media activity and popularity, specifically among otolaryngology residency programs. METHODS: Accredited programs, excluding military and osteopathic, in the United States were included. Activity and popularity on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram were assessed during the same 7-month period from 2016 to 2020. Doximity Residency reputation scores (dividing programs into quartiles) and US News & World Report (comparing programs affiliated with top hospitals versus those with unranked hospitals) were utilized to compare differences based on reputation. RESULTS: Of 104 programs, 91 (88%) had social media accounts. Instagram and Twitter were more commonly used than Facebook, with 78 (75%), 49 (47%), and 42 (40%) accounts, respectively. The cumulative use of all three platforms grew yearly, while Twitter (R2  = 0.9863) and Instagram (R2  = 0.9955) presence increased exponentially. Doximity's top quartile programs had more Facebook (P = .020), Twitter (P < .001), and Instagram (P = .102) accounts. First-quartile programs also adopted each platform months before fourth-quartile programs. Stratified by US News & World Report, ranked programs had more social media accounts, with 24 (53%) on Facebook (P = .028), 32 (71%) on Twitter (P < .001), and 37 (82%) on Instagram (P = .155). Programs with higher reputations were more active and exhibited increased likes and followers over time. CONCLUSION: Social media use among otolaryngology programs has grown exponentially, with Instagram and Twitter becoming the dominant platforms. Higher ranked programs are more active on social media, have more followers, and adopt social media earlier. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 131:2455-2460, 2021.