Outcomes Assessment of Multi-Level Sleep Surgery in Syndromic Versus Non-Syndromic Children.

OBJECTIVES: Analyze the differences in length of stay, cost, disposition, and demographics between syndromic and non-syndromic children undergoing multi-level sleep surgery. METHODS: Children with sleep disordered breathing or obstructive sleep apnea that had undergone sleep surgeries were isolated from the 1997 to 2012 editions of the Kids' Inpatient Database, Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Children were then classified as syndromic or non-syndromic and stratified by level of sleep surgery (tonsillectomy & adenoidectomy, tonsillectomy & adenoidectomy plus other site surgery, other site surgery). Length of stay and cost were reported with Kruskal-Wallis one-way analysis of variance, disposition with binomial logistic regression, and demographics with chi-square. RESULTS: Syndromic children compared to non-syndromic children were more likely to have surgery beyond just tonsillectomy & adenoidectomy and also had a longer length of stay, higher total cost and non-routine disposition (all P < .001). Syndromic children undergoing tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy plus other site surgery had a longer length of stay compared to syndromic children undergoing tonsillectomy & adenoidectomy (6.00 days vs 3.63 days, P < .001). However, no similar statistically significant difference in length of stay was found in non-syndromic children (2.01 days vs 2.87 days, P > .05). CONCLUSION: The potential risks/benefits need to be weighed carefully before undertaking sleep surgery in syndromic children. They experience a longer length of stay, higher cost, and non-routine disposition when compared to non-syndromic children. This is especially true when considering the transition from tonsillectomy & adenoidectomy to tonsillectomy & adenoidectomy plus other site surgery, as syndromic children experience a longer length of stay and non-syndromic children do not.

Sinonasal quality-of-life outcomes after endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery.

BACKGROUND: There are substantial gaps in our understanding of the influence of the endoscopic endonasal approach (EEA) for endoscopic skull base surgery on sinonasal-specific quality of life (QOL) as well as the instruments available for assessment. Our primary objective in this study was to characterize postoperative changes in sinonasal QOL, specifically using the 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22), with a secondary objective of delineating weaknesses in our current understanding of patient symptomatology after EEA for skull base surgery. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review was conducted using PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS for studies reporting SNOT-22 data pre- and postoperatively in patients who underwent EEA for skull base pathologies. Studies were limited to patients ≥18 years of age and excluded patients diagnosed with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). RESULTS: Nineteen unique studies with 27 separate data sets and a total of 1025 patients were used in this meta-analysis. Overall SNOT-22 scores statistically improved at the 6-month (p = 0.0009) and 1-year (p = 0.002) time-points. Patients with preoperative SNOT-22 scores ≥20 achieved postoperative improvements at 12-week (p < 0.00001), 6-month (p < 0.0001), 1-year (p < 0.00001), and long-term follow-up (p < 0.0001). Patients with preoperative SNOT-22 scores <20 remained stable and did not worsen postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing EEA for skull base pathologies who have impaired sinonasal QOL preoperatively demonstrated significant postoperative QOL improvements. Those patients with relatively normal preoperative sinonasal QOL remained asymptomatic postoperatively. This study supports the need for development of a contemporary disease- and approach-specific, validated QOL instrument for skull base pathologies.

Opioid prescribing patterns within otolaryngology.

OBJECTIVE: Determine current opioid prescribing patterns for adult procedures within an academic Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery training program in order to establish a general guideline and more uniform approach to narcotic prescribing practices. METHODS: The is a prospective, single-center pilot study. An online, anonymous survey was sent to all members of the Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery training program at Medical University of South Carolina including residents, fellows, and attending surgeons, and advanced practice providers (APP). The survey consisted of questions including demographics, most commonly prescribed analgesic and the average number of opioid tablets prescribed post-operatively for eleven of the most common adult procedures within Otolaryngology. RESULTS: Forty-two participants responded to the survey. Of the 42 respondents, 20 were attending surgeons, 11 junior level residents (year 1-3), 6 senior level residents (year 4-5), and 5 A.P.P.s. The most commonly prescribed narcotic was hydrocodone-acetaminophen with 83.3% (35/42) of respondents prescribing this medication. Tonsillectomy or uvulopalatopharyngoplasty had the highest average number of tablets prescribed at 32.3 (Range: 5 to 90). Neck dissection, parotidectomy, and thyroidectomy procedures all averaged over 20 tablets. Direct laryngoscopy opioid dose was the lowest at 4.8 tablets (range 0-20). Opioid prescriptions by surgery were broken down by provider class with only septoplasty showing a significant difference with attending physicians prescribing an average of 20 tablets vs 14.1 tablets for residents (P = 0.034). CONCLUSION: We believe there remains an unacceptably high variability in current opioid prescribing patterns within otolaryngology especially within more painful procedures. Establishment of standardized post-operative narcotic guidelines is warranted.

Specialty-specific reduction in opioid prescribing after common pediatric surgical operations.

BACKGROUND: Opioid misuse has reached epidemic proportions, and postoperative opioids have been linked to overdose, diversion, and dependency. We recently found our opioid prescribing practices following common pediatric operations to be inconsistent and excessive. In this study, we evaluate the efficacy of an educational intervention on opioid prescriptions following tonsillectomy and hernia repair. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of prescriptions following outpatient tonsillectomies and hernia repairs at a single institution before and after an educational intervention was performed. The intervention consisted of a single campus-wide grand rounds presentation detailing the surgeon's role in the opioid epidemic. RESULTS: Postoperative opioid prescriptions were significantly reduced for hernia repair following the educational intervention: 4.2 ± 2.9 vs 2.7 ± 2.6 days' supply (p = 0.004). Such a reduction was not observed for post-tonsillectomy opioid prescriptions: 6.3 ± 4.4 vs 5.4 ± 3.0 days' supply (p = 0.226). A greater decrease in interprovider variation was observed for hernia providers after the educational intervention than for tonsillectomy providers, though significant variation continued to be present for both procedures after the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of an educational intervention at reducing postoperative pediatric opioid prescribing may be tied to the specialty-specific role model relationship of the educator to the prescriber. TYPE OF STUDY: retrospective comparative chart review. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Inconsistent and excessive opioid prescribing after common pediatric surgical operations.

OBJECTIVES: Opioid misuse has reached epidemic proportions in the United States. Post-operative opioids have been linked to overdose, diversion, and dependency in adults, but comparatively less is known in children. We evaluated opioid prescriptions following tonsillectomy and hernia repair at our institution. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of all outpatient tonsillectomies and inguinal/umbilical hernia repairs at a single institution. Data on opioid and non-opioid analgesic prescription characteristics and post-operative pain control were reviewed. RESULTS: 470 procedures were reviewed (276 tonsillectomy, 194 hernia repair). In patients with an indication (> 5 years-old in tonsillectomy, > 1 year-old in hernia repair), 85.0% and 85.6% received a post-op opioid prescription, respectively. Mean days' opioid supplied was 6.19 +/- 4.39 days in tonsillectomy and 4.30 +/- 2.94 days for hernia repair. There was significant inter- and intra-provider variation in the days' supplied of post-operative opioid. 90-100% of patients reported adequate pain control at discharge callback regardless of pain control regimen (opioid alone, opioid + non-opioid analgesic, non-opioid analgesic alone). CONCLUSIONS: Significant variation in post-operative prescribing practices was identified as well as overall over-prescription, which will serve as a starting point to institute evidence-based intervention to reduce post-operative opioid misuse after these common pediatric surgical procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Earphone and Aided Word Recognition Differences in Cochlear Implant Candidates.

OBJECTIVE: Compare word recognition scores for adults undergoing cochlear implant evaluations (CIE) measured using earphones and hearing aids. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of data obtained during adult CIEs. SETTING: Tertiary cochlear implant center. PATIENTS: Two hundred eight ears in 183 subjects with greater than 10% word recognition scores measured with earphones. INTERVENTIONS/MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURED: Preoperative pure-tone thresholds and word recognition scores measured with earphones and hearing aids. RESULTS: A review of audiological data obtained from 2012 to 2017 during adult CIEs was conducted. Overall, a weak positive correlation (r = 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.17-0.40, p < 0.001) was observed between word recognition scores measured with earphones and hearing aids. Earphone to aided differences (EAD) ranged from -38 to +72% (mean 14.3 ±â€Š19.9%). Consistent with EADs, 108 ears (51.9%) had earphone scores that were significantly higher than aided word recognition scores (+EAD), as determined by 95% confidence intervals; for 14 ears (6.7%), earphone scores were significantly lower than aided scores (-EAD). Moreover, of the patients with earphone word recognition scores ≥50%, 82.6% were CI candidates based on aided AzBio+10 dB SNR scores. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate the limited diagnostic value of word recognition scores measured under earphones for patients undergoing CIE. Nevertheless, aided word recognition is rarely measured before CIEs, which limits the information available to determine CI candidacy and referral for CIEs. Earlier and routine measurement of aided word recognition may help guide clinical decision making by determining the extent to which patients are achieving maximum benefit with their hearing aids or should consider cochlear implantation.