Shared Decision-Making in Patients Seeking Surgery for Facial Trauma: The Role of Decisional Conflict and Perceived Discrimination.

Background: Shared decision-making (SDM) may facilitate challenging discussions between patients with facial trauma and reconstructive surgeons. Objective: To determine among patients seeking surgical evaluation for facial trauma, whether patient demographics, decisional conflict (DC), or experiences of discrimination in health care are associated with patient perceptions of SDM, as measured by scored responses on the CollaboRATE-10 questionnaire. Methods: English-speaking adults who presented to the offices of five facial trauma surgeons were contacted by telephone after their visit to complete a cross-sectional survey. Results: After screening 247 patients, 131 patients were recruited (53.0%). DC and history of discrimination were associated with lower perceived SDM (p < 0.001 and p = 0.048, respectively). After adjusting for age, sex, race, education, initial emergency department presentation, DC, and past discrimination, patients of older age (odds ratio [OR] 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-1.09) and non-White race (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.1-11.4) had higher perceptions of SDM; patients with DC (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.01-0.20) reported less SDM. Conclusions: Patients who present to clinic for surgical evaluation after facial trauma feel that their physicians involve them less when deciding on a treatment plan if they have experienced discrimination in health care settings in the past, or if they have significant difficulty deciding between treatment options.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures in Rhinoplasty: Need for Use and Implementation.

Patient-reported outcome metrics (PROMs) are increasingly utilized to capture data about patients' quality of life. PROMs play an important role in the value-based health care movement by providing a patient-centered metric of quality. There are many barriers to the implementation of PROMs, and widespread adoption requires buy-in from numerous stakeholders including patients, clinicians, institutions, and payers. Several validated PROMs have been utilized by facial plastic surgeons to measure both functional and aesthetic outcomes among rhinoplasty patients. These PROMs can help clinicians and rhinoplasty patients participate in shared decision making (SDM), a process via which clinicians and patients arrive at treatment decisions together through a patient-centered approach. However, widespread adoption of PROMs and SDM has not yet been achieved. Further work should focus on overcoming barriers to implementation and engaging key stakeholders to increase the utilization of PROMs in rhinoplasty.

Sponsorship in Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery: A Pathway to Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion.

Importance: Sponsorship, distinct from mentorship or coaching, involves advancing the careers of individuals by nominating them for roles, increasing the visibility of their work, or facilitating opportunities. Sponsorship can open doors and enhance diversity; however, achieving desirable outcomes requires equitable approaches to cultivating potential in sponsees and promoting their success. The evidence on equitable sponsorship practices has not been critically examined, and this special communication reviews the literature, highlighting best practices. Observations: Sponsorship addresses an unmet need for supporting individuals who have historically been afforded fewer, less visible, or less effective opportunities for upward career mobility. Barriers to equitable sponsorship include the paucity of sponsors of underrepresented identity; smaller and underdeveloped networks among these sponsors; lack of transparent, intentional sponsorship processes; and structural inequities that are associated with recruitment, retention, and advancement of diverse individuals. Strategies to enhance equitable sponsorship are cross-functional, building on foundational principles of equity, diversity, and inclusion; patient safety and quality improvement; and insights from education and business. Equity, diversity, and inclusion principles inform training on implicit bias, cross-cultural communication, and intersectional mentoring. Practices inspired by patient safety and quality improvement emphasize continuously improving outreach to diverse candidates. Education and business insights emphasize minimizing cognitive errors, appreciating the bidirectional character of interactions, and ensuring that individuals are prepared for and supported in new roles. Collectively, these principles provide a framework for sponsorship. Persistent knowledge gaps are associated with timing, resources, and systems for sponsorship. Conclusions and Relevance: The nascent literature on sponsorship is limited but draws on best practices from various disciplines and has potential to promote diversity within the profession. Strategies include developing systematic approaches, providing effective training, and supporting a culture of sponsorship. Future research is needed to define best practices for identifying sponsees, cultivating sponsors, tracking outcomes, and fostering longitudinal practices that are sustainable at local, regional, and national levels.

Evidence-Based Medicine for Ballistic Maxillofacial Trauma.

Ballistic trauma is a serious health issue with significant costs to physical, psychosocial, economic, and societal well-being. It may be caused from firearms, explosive devices, or any other projectile forces, and is characterized by severe tissue loss and evolving tissue devitalization. This review covers mechanism, diagnosis, and management of ballistic maxillofacial trauma, specifically. Initial evaluation includes stabilization of airway, bleeding, and circulation, followed by assessment of other injuries. The overall degree of tissue damage is determined by intrinsic patient factors and extrinsic projectile factors. Management of ballistic injuries has shifted toward advocation for early operative repair with the advent of antibiotics and advanced techniques in maxillofacial reconstruction. Appropriate timing and method of reconstruction should be carefully selected on a case-by-case basis. While ballistic trauma research is limited to studies biased by institutional practices, areas for further study identified from current literature include guidelines directing timing of reconstructive surgery; thresholds for free tissue transfer; handling of retained projectiles; incidence of surgical complications; and clinical outcomes for computer-aided surgical repair of these highly destructive injuries.

Incidence and Management of Facial Paralysis After Skull Base Trauma, an Administrative Database Study.

OBJECTIVE: Report the incidence of and treatment patterns for facial nerve palsy after skull base fracture. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: IBM MarketScan Commercial Database (2006-2019). PATIENTS: Human subjects with skull base fracture, per International Classification of Diseases-9th and 10th Revisions-Clinical Modification diagnosis codes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were the incidence and median time to facial nerve palsy diagnosis within 30 days of skull base fracture. Secondary outcomes were treatments (corticosteroids, antivirals, facial nerve decompression, botulinum toxin, and facial reanimation), demographics, and rates of hearing loss, vertigo, tympanic membrane rupture, cerebrospinal fluid leak, comorbidities, and loss of consciousness. RESULTS: The 30-day incidence of facial nerve palsy after skull base trauma was 1.0% (738 of 72,273 patients). The median (95% confidence interval [CI]) time to diagnosis was 6 (6-7) days, and only 22.9% were diagnosed within 1 day. There were significantly higher rates (risk difference, 95% CI) of hearing loss (26%, 22-29%), tympanic membrane rupture (6.3%, 4.5-8.1%), cerebrospinal fluid leak (6.4%, 4.5-8.3%), comorbidity (14%, 10.4-17.6%), and loss of consciousness (24.3%, 20.7-27.9%). Loss of consciousness was associated with longer median (95% CI) time to facial nerve palsy diagnosis: 10 (9-10) days. Corticosteroids were the most common treatment but only reported for less than one-third of patients. Only eight patients underwent facial nerve decompression. CONCLUSIONS: Facial nerve palsy after skull base fracture is associated with higher comorbidity, and the diagnosis is often delayed. Few patients were treated with surgery, and there are inconsistencies in the types and timing of treatments.

Development of second primary malignancies after transoral surgery in human papilloma virus-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Little data exists regarding the incidence of oropharyngeal and upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) second primary malignancies (SPM) among human papilloma virus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC). Here we evaluate SPM rates among patients with HPV-related OPSCC. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of 412 patients with HPV-related OPSCC who underwent transoral resection +/- adjuvant therapy at a single center between 1996 and 2018. RESULTS: Twenty patients (4.9%) developed SPM of the UADT, nine (2.2%) occurring in the oropharynx. Median time to diagnosis was 59.5 months (0-173 months). Risk of SPM was lower for patients receiving adjuvant radiation (aHR: 0.25, 95%CI: 0.08-0.78). There was no difference in overall or disease-free survival between those with and without SPM. CONCLUSION: The rate of SPM among patients with HPV-positive OPSCC is lower than reported rates among HPV-negative OPSCC. To date, this is the largest study evaluating SPM in patients with surgically treated HPV-positive OPSCC.

Curbing the Cough: Multimodal Treatments for Neurogenic Cough: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Neurogenic cough affects 11% of Americans and causes significant detriment to quality of life. With the advent of novel therapies, the objective of this review is to determine how procedural therapies (e.g., superior laryngeal nerve block) compare to other established pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments for neurogenic cough. METHODS: With the assistance of a medical librarian, a systematic review was performed using PICOS (patients, interventions, comparator, outcome, study design) format: adults with neurogenic cough receiving any pharmacologic or non-pharmacologic treatment for neurogenic cough compared to adults with neurogenic cough receiving any other relevant interventions, or treated as single cohorts, assessed with cough-specific quality of life outcomes, in all study designs and case series with ≥ 10 cases. Case reports, review articles, non-human studies, non-English language articles, and unavailable full-text articles were excluded. RESULTS: There were 2408 patients with neurogenic cough in this review, treated with medical therapy (77%), speech therapy (19%), both medical and speech therapy (1%), and procedural therapy (3%). The included studies ranged from low to intermediate quality. Overall, most interventions demonstrated successful improvement in cough. However, the heterogeneity of included study designs precluded direct comparisons between intervention types. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis compared various treatments for neurogenic cough. Procedural therapy should be considered in the armamentarium of neurogenic cough treatments, particularly in patients refractory to, or intolerant of, the side effects of medical therapy. Lastly, this review illuminates key areas for improving neurogenic cough diagnosis, such as strict adherence to diagnostic and treatment guidelines, sophisticated reflux testing, and standardized, consistent outcome reporting. Laryngoscope, 132:107-123, 2022.

Patients' Views of Shared Decision-making and Decisional Conflict in Otolaryngologic Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Importance: A patient's decision to undergo surgery may be fraught with uncertainty and decisional conflict. The unpredictable nature of the COVID-19 pandemic warrants further study into factors associated with patient decision-making. Objective: To assess decisional conflict and patient-specific concerns for people undergoing otolaryngologic surgery during the pandemic. Design, Setting, Participants: This prospective cross-sectional survey study was conducted via telephone from April 22 to August 31, 2020. English-speaking adults scheduled for surgery from a single academic surgical center were invited to participate. Individuals who were non-English speaking, lacked autonomous medical decision-making capacity, scheduled for emergent surgery, or had a communication disability were excluded. For race and ethnicity reporting, participants were classified dichotomously as White according to the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or non-White as a collective term including Black or African American, American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, or Pacific Islander race and ethnicity. Exposures: The SURE Questionnaire (sure of myself, understand information, risks/benefits ratio, and encouragement) was used to screen for decisional conflict, with a total score greater than or equal to 3 indicating clinically significant decisional conflict. Participants were asked to share their specific concerns about having surgery. Main Outcome and Measures: Decisional conflict and patient demographic data were assessed via bivariate analyses, multivariable logistic regression and conjunctive consolidation. Patient-specific concerns were qualitatively analyzed for summative themes. Results: Of 444 patients screened for eligibility, 182 (40.9%) respondents participated. The median age was 60.5 years (interquartile range, 48-70 years). The racial and ethnic identity of the participants was classified as binary White (84% [153 of 182]) and non-White (16% [29 of 182]). The overall prevalence of decisional conflict was 19% (34 of 182). Decisional conflict was more prevalent among non-White than White participants (proportion difference 18.8%, 95% CI, 0.6%-37.0% and adjusted odds ratio 3.0; 95% CI, 1.2-7.4). Combining information from multiple variables through conjunctive consolidation, the group with the highest rate of decisional conflict was non-White patients with no college education receiving urgent surgery (odds ratio, 10.8; 95% CI, 2.6-45.0). Intraoperative and postoperative concerns were the most common themes expressed by participants. There was a clinically significant difference in the proportion of participants who screened positive for decisional conflict (30%) and expressed postoperative concerns than those who screened negative for decisional conflict (17%) (proportion difference, 13%; 95% CI, 1%-25%). Among patients reporting concerns about COVID-19, most screened positive for decisional conflict. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this cross-sectional survey study suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with decisional conflict in patients undergoing otolaryngologic surgery. Consistent discussion of risks and benefits is essential. The role of race and ethnicity in decisional conflict warrants further study.

New Age Mentoring and Disruptive Innovation-Navigating the Uncharted With Vision, Purpose, and Equity.

For individuals aspiring to a career in otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, mentorship can shape destiny. Mentorship helps assure safe passage into the specialty, and it influences the arc of professional development across the career continuum. Even before the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, technology and social networking were transforming mentorship in otolaryngology. Now, in an increasingly virtual world, where in-person interactions are the exception, mentorship plays an even more pivotal role. Mentors serve as trusted guides, helping learners navigate accelerating trends toward early specialization, competency-based assessments, and key milestones. However, several structural barriers render the playing field unlevel. For medical students, cancellation of visiting clerkships, in-person rotations, and other face-to-face interactions may limit access to mentors. The pandemic and virtual landscape particularly threaten the already-leaky pipeline for underrepresented medical students. These challenges may persist into residency and later career stages, where structural inequities continue to subtly influence opportunities and pairings of mentors and mentees. Hence, overreliance on serendipitous encounters can exacerbate disparities, even amid societal mandates for equity. The decision to take deliberate steps toward mentoring outreach and engagement has profound implications for what otolaryngology will look like in years to come. This article introduces the concept of new age mentoring, shining a light on how to modernize practices. The key shifts are from passive to active engagement; from amorphous to structured relationships; and from hierarchical dynamics to bidirectional mentoring. Success is predicated on intentional outreach and purposefulness in championing diversity, equity, and inclusion in the progressively technology-driven landscape.

Survival Outcomes of De Novo vs Inverted Papilloma-Associated Sinonasal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Overall, the prognosis of sinonasal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is poor. This malignancy can arise de novo or from inverted papillomas, but it is unclear whether survival differences between the 2 pathologies exist. Objective: To assess for survival differences between patients with sinonasal de novo SCC (dnSCC) and those with inverted papilloma-associated SCC (IPSCC). Data Sources: A search of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library from inception to January 23, 2020, with cross-referencing of retrieved studies, was performed. Additional data were requested from authors. Study Selection: Inclusion and exclusion criteria were designed to capture studies with survival outcomes of adults with sinonasal SCC who underwent regular treatment. Clinical trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, and case series with more than 10 adults aged 18 years or older with sinonasal SCC were included. Exclusion criteria were studies on non-SCC sinonasal neoplasms, studies without histopathologic diagnoses, non-English language articles, nonhuman animal studies, and abstract-only articles. Two blinded investigators (J.J.L., A.M.P., T.W.E., or N.S.W.) screened each abstract and full text, and a third investigator (J.J.L. or P.P.) adjudicated discrepancies. Of 729 unique citations, 26 studies of 1194 total patients were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines were followed. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) criteria were used to assess study quality. Two blinded investigators (J.J.L., A.M.P., T.W.E., or N.S.W.) independently extracted data from each study. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was overall survival, and secondary outcomes were disease-free and disease-specific survival. Before data collection, it was hypothesized that the dnSCC cohort would have worse survival outcomes than the IPSCC cohort. Results: One study of patients with dnSCC, 12 studies of patients with IPSCC, and 5 studies with both cohorts were included in the meta-analysis of overall survival. The pooled 5-year overall survival rate for 255 patients with dnSCC was 56% (95% CI, 41%-71%; I2 = 83.8%) and for 475 patients with IPSCC was 65% (95% CI, 56%-73%; I2 = 75.7%). Five comparative studies of both cohorts totaling 240 patients with dnSCC and 155 patients with IPSCC were included in another meta-analysis. The pooled overall survival hazard ratio was 1.87 (95% CI, 1.24-2.84; I2 = 0%). Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review and meta-analysis found that patients with dnSCC had almost a 2-fold increased risk of mortality compared with those with IPSCC. Large, multicenter studies are necessary to validate these findings before considering treatment alterations such as de-escalation based on histopathology.

Physical Therapy for Iatrogenic Facial Paralysis: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Facial paralysis (FP) after surgery has substantial functional, emotional, and financial consequences. Most iatrogenic FP is managed by watchful waiting, with the expectation of facial function recovery. A potential treatment is physical therapy (PT). Objective: To investigate whether noninvasive PT compared with no PT or other intervention improves facial nerve outcomes in adults with iatrogenic FP. Evidence Review: Patients with noniatrogenic FP, facial reanimation surgery, and invasive adjunctive treatments (acupuncture or botulinum toxin injection) were excluded. A systematic review was conducted for records discussing iatrogenic FP and PT; a search for these records was performed using Ovid MEDLINE (1946-2019), Embase (1947-2019), Scopus (1823-2019), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (2004-2019), and ClinicalTrials.gov (1997-2019). The references of all the included articles were also assessed for eligible studies. All human participant, English-language study designs with at least 2 cases were included. Quality assessment was performed using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) and the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool for randomized controlled trials. All search strategies were completed on May 16, 2019, and again on October 1, 2019. Findings: Fifteen studies (7 of which were retrospective cohort studies) and 313 patients with iatrogenic FP were included in the systematic review. Most iatrogenic FP (166 patients [53%]) was associated with parotidectomy; traditional PT (ie, facial massage) was the most common intervention (196 patients [63%]). The use of various facial grading systems and inconsistent reporting of outcomes prevented direct comparison of PT types. Conclusions and Relevance: Because of heterogeneity in reported outcomes of facial nerve recovery, definitive conclusions were unable to be made regarding the association between PT and outcomes of iatrogenic FP. Physical therapy probably has benefit and is associated with no harm in patients with iatrogenic FP.

Reporting of Effect Size and Confidence Intervals in JAMA Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery.

Importance: Effect sizes and confidence intervals (CIs) are critical for the interpretation of the results for any outcome of interest. Objective: To evaluate the frequency of reporting effect sizes and CIs in the results of analytical studies. Design, Setting, and Participants: Descriptive review of analytical studies published from January 2012 to December 2015 in JAMA Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery. Methods: A random sample of 121 articles was reviewed in this study. Descriptive studies were excluded from the analysis. Seven independent reviewers participated in the evaluation of the articles, with 2 reviewers assigned per article. The review process was standardized for each article; the Methods and Results sections were reviewed for the outcomes of interest. Descriptive statistics for each outcome were calculated and reported accordingly. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes of interest included the presence of effect size and associated CIs. Secondary outcomes of interest included a priori descriptions of statistical methodology, power analysis, and expectation of effect size. Results: There were 107 articles included for analysis. The majority of the articles were retrospective cohort studies (n = 36 [36%]) followed by cross-sectional studies (n = 18 [17%]). A total of 58 articles (55%) reported an effect size for an outcome of interest. The most common effect size used was difference of mean, followed by odds ratio and correlation coefficient, which were reported 17 (16%), 15 (13%), and 12 times (11%), respectively. Confidence intervals were associated with 29 of these effect sizes (27%), and 9 of these articles (8%) included interpretation of the CI. A description of the statistical methodology was provided in 97 articles (91%), while 5 (5%) provided an a priori power analysis and 8 (7%) provided a description of expected effect size finding. Conclusions and Relevance: Improving results reporting is necessary to enhance the reader's ability to interpret the results of any given study. This can only be achieved through increasing the reporting of effect sizes and CIs rather than relying on P values for both statistical significance and clinically meaningful results.