An Analysis of Political Contributions from Otolaryngologists in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Doctors can influence the development of sound healthcare policy through financial contributions to political campaigns and candidates. Our objective was to characterize the political contributions of otolaryngologists in the United States, both individually and through the ENT Political Action Committee (ENTPAC) between the years 2003 and 2020. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Publicly available information on the internet: fec.gov. METHODS: The Federal Election Commission's website, fec.gov, was used to identify the political contributions of individual otolaryngologists and the ENTPAC between 2003 and 2020. Each contribution is associated with a political group or candidate, designated as a Republican, Democratic, or Independent entity. RESULTS: A total of 1407 distinct political contributions were made by individuals identifying as otolaryngologists between 2003 and 2020, totaling $432,201. Overall, Republicans received more individual donations than Democrats (711 vs 540), while Democrats received more money ($231,139 vs $183,427). Donations peaked during election years, with the total amount overall increasing each election year ($9664 in 2004 vs $75,102 in 2020). The predominant political party receiving donations between 2003 and 2020 in each US state matched each state's predominant party of the governors and senators 48.6% of the time. The ENTPAC donated $3,027,383 between 2003 and 2020 to a variety of political candidates and entities. CONCLUSION: Otolaryngologists are making increased political contributions over time and interest in political advocacy may be at an all-time high. Increased time and attention should be devoted to educating otolaryngologists to best politically advocate for interests which are of the most importance to themselves and the profession.

Evaluation of Laryngology Fellowship Programs' Online Information.

OBJECTIVE: Prospective laryngology fellows have limited opportunities to learn about fellowship programs besides personal conversations with program directors and mentors. Online information about fellowships may optimize the laryngology match process. The purpose of this study was to assess the utility of online information about laryngology fellowship programs through analysis of program websites and surveying current and recent laryngology fellows. METHODS: The websites of 20 laryngology fellowship programs were analyzed for the presence of 18 unique criteria, previously described in the literature. A survey was distributed to current and recent fellows to determine helpful resources and improvements of fellowship websites. RESULTS: On average, program websites fulfilled 33% of the 18 criteria used for analysis. The criteria most often fulfilled were "program description," "case descriptions," and "fellowship director contact information." Of respondents from our survey, 47% strongly disagreed that fellowship websites helped them identify desirable programs, and 57% somewhat or strongly agreed that more detailed websites would have made identification of desirable programs easier. Fellows were most interested in finding information about program descriptions, contact information for program directors and coordinators, and current laryngology fellows. CONCLUSION: Based on our findings, laryngology fellowship program websites can improve, making the application process easier. As programs incorporate more information regarding contact information, current fellows, interviews, and case volume/descriptions on their websites, they will allow applicants to make more informed decisions and find the programs that fit them the best.