Academic Benchmarks for Otolaryngology Leaders.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to characterize current benchmarks for academic otolaryngologists serving in positions of leadership and identify factors potentially associated with promotion to these positions. METHODS: Information regarding chairs (or division chiefs), vice chairs, and residency program directors was obtained from faculty listings and organized by degree(s) obtained, academic rank, fellowship training status, sex, and experience. Research productivity was characterized by (a) successful procurement of active grants from the National Institutes of Health and prior grants from the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation Centralized Otolaryngology Research Efforts program and (b) scholarly impact, as measured by the h-index. RESULTS: Chairs had the greatest amount of experience (32.4 years) and were the least likely to have multiple degrees, with 75.8% having an MD degree only. Program directors were the most likely to be fellowship trained (84.8%). Women represented 16% of program directors, 3% of chairs, and no vice chairs. Chairs had the highest scholarly impact (as measured by the h-index) and the greatest external grant funding. CONCLUSION: This analysis characterizes the current picture of leadership in academic otolaryngology. Chairs, when compared to their vice chair and program director counterparts, had more experience and greater research impact. Women were poorly represented among all academic leadership positions.

Geographic differences in academic promotion practices, fellowship training, and scholarly impact.

PURPOSE: Previous literature described how clinical fellowship training impacts scholarly production among academic otolaryngologists, finding that fellowship-trained practitioners had higher research productivity than their non-fellowship-trained peers, and head and neck (H&N) surgeons and otologists had the highest scholarly impact. In this analysis we investigate whether geographic differences in academic promotion and scholarly impact exist, and whether such differences are associated with emphasis on regional fellowship training patterns. METHODS: The Scopus database was used to determine scholarly impact (as measured by the h-index) of 1109 academic otolaryngologists from 97 departments. Online faculty listings were organized by fellowship training, academic rank, and location. RESULTS: Fellowship-trained practitioners had greater research productivity than non-fellowship-trained otolaryngologists (H=9.5 ± 0.26 SEM vs. 6.5 ± 0.43, p<0.001), a finding that persisted throughout except in the Mountain and East South Central Regions. H&N surgeons and otologists had the highest h-indices. Practitioners in the West had the highest h-index, with differences persisting upon examination of junior faculty. The West (62.1%) and Midwest (60.5%) had the highest proportions of senior faculty. Regional differences in scholarly impact and academic promotion were further noted upon organizing faculty by subspecialty fellowship training. CONCLUSIONS: Geographic differences in academic promotion and scholarly impact exist, most markedly among junior faculty. Practitioners in the West had high impact and were more represented at senior ranks. Upon examination by fellowship training status, fellowship-trained otolaryngologists had higher impact in most, but not all, geographic regions. Regional variations in promotion were noted upon organizing faculty by subspecialty, although association with scholarly impact differs by region.

Diversifying Researchers and Funding in Otolaryngology.

Research productivity is a key metric used in evaluation for advancement and promotion in academic medicine. There are known gender, race, and ethnicity disparities in otolaryngology research and funding. Female academic otolaryngologists have been shown to lag in scholarly productivity, representation at national meetings, leadership positions on journal editorial boards, and National Institutes of Health and industry funding. Underrepresented minorities have been shown to be less successful at obtaining Centralized Otolaryngology Research Efforts grant funding. Directed approaches, such as research funding for women and minorities or targeted recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty, may move the field toward parity.

Overview of Sinonasal and Ventral Skull Base Malignancy Management.

Significant technological advances have fostered a movement toward minimally invasive surgical interventions for the management of ventral skull base malignancies. The care of patients with these lesions ideally involves an interdisciplinary skull base team that includes otolaryngologists, neurologic surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. This article describes considerations essential for diagnosis, prognosis, and preoperative evaluation. Furthermore, surgical nuances, strategies for skull base reconstruction, and nonsurgical options are briefly discussed. This overview may be useful as an up-to-date description of the challenging clinical scenarios associated with these lesions.

Pitfalls in Sinus Surgery: An Overview of Complications.

There is a potential for significant complications from the medical and surgical treatment of rhinosinusitis because of the intimate relationship between the paranasal sinuses and surrounding vital structures. Familiarity with the complex anatomic relationships between the skull base and other critical structures and knowledge of pharmacologic properties of commonly used medical therapies are essential for preventing serious and harmful seqsuelae. The authors hope that this review represents a valuable addition to the otolaryngologist-in-training's therapeutic armamentarium, and also serves as a reminder of the potential pitfalls for the experienced sinus surgeon.

Purely endoscopic endonasal surgery of the craniovertebral junction: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic endonasal surgery (EES) is a relatively novel approach to the craniovertebral junction (CVJ). The purpose of this analysis is to determine the surgical outcomes of patients who undergo purely EES of the CVJ. METHODS: A search for articles related to EES of the CVJ was performed using the MEDLINE/PubMed database. A bibliographic search was done for additional articles. Demographics, presenting symptoms, imaging findings, complications, follow-up, and patient outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Eighty-five patients from 30 articles were included. The mean patient age was 47.9 ± 24.8 years (range, 3 to 96 years), with 44.7% being male. The most common presenting symptom was myelopathy (n = 64, 75.3%). The most common indications for surgery were brainstem compression secondary to basilar invagination (n = 41, 48.2%) and odontoid pannus (n = 20, 23.5%). Odontoidectomy was performed in 97.6% of cases. Intraoperative complications occurred in 16 patients (18.8%) and postoperative complications occurred in 18 patients (21.2%). Six patients developed postoperative respiratory failure necessitating a tracheostomy. Neurologic improvement was seen in 89.4% of patients at a mean follow-up of 22.2 months. CONCLUSION: Our analysis found that EES of the CVJ results in a high rate of neurologic improvement with acceptable complication rates. Given its minimally invasive nature and high success rate, this approach appears to be a reasonable alternative to the traditional transoral approach in select cases. This study represents the largest pooled sample size of EES of the CVJ to date. Increasing use of the endoscopic endonasal approach will allow for further studies with greater statistical power.

Do AAO-HNSF CORE Grants Predict Future NIH Funding Success?

OBJECTIVE: To determine (1) whether academic otolaryngologists who have received an American Academy of Otolaryngology- Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO-HNSF) Centralized Otolaryngology Research Efforts (CORE) grant are more likely to procure future National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding; (2) whether CORE grants or NIH Career Development (K) awards have a stronger association with scholarly impact. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Historical cohort. METHODS: Scholarly impact, as measured by the h-index, publication experience, and prior grant history, were determined for CORE-funded and non-CORE-funded academic otolaryngologists. All individuals were assessed for NIH funding history. RESULTS: Of 192 academic otolaryngologists with a CORE funding history, 39.6% had active or prior NIH awards versus 15.1% of 1002 non-CORE-funded faculty (P < .0001). Higher proportions of CORE-funded otolaryngologists have received K-series and R-series grants from the NIH (P-values < .05). K-grant recipients had higher h-indices than CORE recipients (12.6 vs 7.1, P < .01). Upon controlling for rank and experience, this difference remained significant among junior faculty. CONCLUSIONS: A higher proportion of academic otolaryngologists with prior AAO-HNSF CORE funding have received NIH funding relative to their non-CORE-funded peers, suggesting that the CORE program may be successful in its stated goals of preparing individuals for the NIH peer review process, although further prospective study is needed to evaluate a "cause and effect" relationship. Individuals with current or prior NIH K-grants had greater research productivity than those with CORE funding history. Both cohorts had higher scholarly impact values than previously published figures among academic otolaryngologists, highlighting that both CORE grants and NIH K-grants awards are effective career development resources.

Physician accountability in iatrogenic cerebrospinal fluid leak litigation.

BACKGROUND: The potentially severe complications resulting from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak makes iatrogenic injury a medicolegal area of concern for otolaryngologists and neurosurgeons. The objectives of this analysis were to study legal outcomes as well as medical and nonmedical elements affecting malpractice litigation. METHODS: Public court records available in the Westlaw legal database (Thomson Reuters, New York, NY) were searched for medical malpractice litigation related to iatrogenic CSF leak. Of the 18 jury verdicts and settlements included, outcomes and awards, patient demographic data, and other factors instrumental in determining legal responsibility were recorded for comparison. RESULTS: Ten (55.6%) cases were resolved in the defendant's favor, 2 (11.1%) resulted in damages awarded by a jury, and 6 (33.3%) were settled out of court before resolution of trial. Mean damages awarded were $1.1 million, while out of court settlements averaged $966,887. Malpractice stemming from patients who underwent endoscopic sinus surgery comprised 77.8% of cases analyzed. The most frequent alleged factors cited for litigation included having to undergo additional surgery (88.9%), developing meningitis (50.0%), and failing to recognize complications in a timely manner (44.4%). Perceived deficits in informed consent were alleged in one-third of cases. CONCLUSION: Although a slight majority of cases were resolved in the defendant's favor, payments made were considerable, averaging approximately $1 million. Strategies to decrease liability and allow patients to make more informed decisions should include clear communication with patients that explicitly states potential risks, such as meningitis, and possible need to undergo additional reparative surgery.

Establishing a training program for residents in robotic surgery.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To develop a program for teaching robotic skills to residents. To assess the development of proficiency in basic robotic surgical skills in a resident cohort. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective educational project using a commercially available surgical robot. Residents use a surgical robot to complete a designated set of tasks intended to simulate surgical maneuvers. Performance is analyzed for errors and total time of procedure. METHODS: Otolaryngology residents are introduced to robotic surgery with a tutorial on the usage of the da Vinci Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA). Participants perform defined exercises accomplishing the following tasks: circular pin transfer, simultaneous bimanual carrying, precision bead drop, needle passing, and suture tying. Performance of these tasks can be quantitatively assessed. RESULTS: An educational program for teaching residents basic robotic skills can easily be introduced into a residency program. Resident progress in acquiring robotic surgical skills can be measured. The analysis of variance for composite score revealed statistically significant effects for task (F(4,24) = 8.11, P < .01) and trial (F(2,12) = 5.71, P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic surgery will likely become an integral part of otolaryngologic surgical practice. Training programs in robotic surgery need to be formally established in residency programs. We present a preliminary program for introducing robotic surgical skills in residency training.