Racial Disparities in Head and Neck Cancer: It's Not Just About Access.

OBJECTIVE: Medical literature identifies stark racial disparities in head and neck cancer (HNC) in the United States, primarily between non-Hispanic white (NHW) and non-Hispanic black (NHB) populations. The etiology of this disparity is often attributed to inequitable access to health care and socioeconomic status (SES). However, other contributors have been reported. We performed a systematic review to better understand the multifactorial landscape driving racial disparities in HNC. DATA SOURCES: A systematic review was conducted in Covidence following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Guidelines. A search of PubMed, SCOPUS, and CINAHL for literature published through November 2022 evaluating racial disparities in HNC identified 2309 publications. REVIEW METHODS: Full texts were screened by 2 authors independently, and inconsistencies were resolved by consensus. Three hundred forty publications were ultimately selected and categorized into themes including disparities in access/SES, treatment, lifestyle, and biology. Racial groups examined included NHB and NHW patients but also included Hispanic, Native American, and Asian/Pacific Islander patients to a lesser extent. RESULTS: Of the 340 articles, 192 focused on themes of access/SES, including access to high-quality hospitals, insurance coverage, and transportation contributing to disparate HNC outcomes. Additional themes discussed in 148 articles included incongruities in surgical recommendations, tobacco/alcohol use, human papillomavirus-associated malignancies, and race-informed silencing of tumor suppressor genes. CONCLUSION: Differential access to care plays a significant role in racial disparities in HNC, disproportionately affecting NHB populations. However, there are other significant themes driving racial disparities. Future studies should focus on providing equitable access to care while also addressing these additional sources of disparities in HNC.

"Repository of Cochlear Implant Information:" A Multi-Institutional REDCap Database.

PURPOSE: To describe the creation of a multi-center cochlear implant database as a template for future medical database design. The first clinical question examined was the association between BMI on cochlear implant surgical time and postoperative outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective repository in REDCap, named the "Repository of Cochlear Implant Information" (ROCII), was created and collected de-identified data on patients who underwent cochlear implantation. Data was exported and stratified into three BMI groupings (<25, 25.0-29.9, ≥ 30.0). Differences in surgical time and AZBio Sentence Test postoperative score changes were analyzed using the mixed-effect model. RESULTS: The mean BMI (n = 145) was 28.52, and the mean surgical time was 128.9 min. The BMI < 25 reference group (n = 50) and the BMI 25.0-29.9 group (n = 50) had an identical mean surgical time of 127.5 min. The BMI ≥30.0 group (n = 45) had a mean surgical time of 132 min, however this difference was not statistically significant when compared to the reference group (p = 0.4727). The mean AZBio postoperative score change (n = 74) was 63.32. The BMI < 25 reference group (n = 29) had a mean postoperative change of 56.66. The BMI 25.0-29.9 group (n = 22) and BMI ≥30.0 group (n = 23) had mean postoperative changes of 61.32 and 73.65 respectively, however these differences were not statistically significant compared to the reference group (p = 0.5847, 0.0637). CONCLUSION: BMI did not have a significant association with surgical time or postoperative outcome and therefore should not be a contraindication for implantation. ROCII will facilitate a deeper understanding of the evaluation process, outcomes, and patient experience of cochlear implantation across institutions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 1.