Female Surgical Ergonomics in Otolaryngology: A National Survey Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the nature and impact surgical ergonomic challenges experienced by female otolaryngologists. STUDY DESIGN: National survey study. SETTING: Female otolaryngology residents, fellows and attendings recruited via social media posting and email distribution. METHODS: We distributed a survey study to female otolaryngologists throughout the United States. The height and glove size of participants reporting difficulties with equipment and instruments were compared to those not reporting difficulties. RESULTS: Ninety-six female otolaryngologists participated in our study, comprised of 43% residents, 10% fellows, and 47% attendings. Ninety percent of participants reported difficulties using equipment and 77% of participants reported difficulty with instruments, the most common being nasal endoscopic instruments (28%). The vast majority of participants reported pain during and (or) after the operation (92%). Head and neck (53%) and rhinology (44%) were identified as particularly challenging specialities, but only 25% of participants reported that ergonomics affected their career plans. Participants felt that adjustable equipment (60%), a variety of sizes of instruments (43%), and more discussion around ergonomics (47%) would help. Respondents reported adjusting the operating room to accommodate their size took extra time (44%) and was a mental burden (39%). Participants reporting difficulties with operating room equipment were significantly shorter than those without difficulties (64 inches vs 67 inches, P = .037), and those reporting difficulties with instruments had a smaller median glove size (6 vs 6.5, P = .018). CONCLUSION: Surgical ergonomics represent a challenge for female otolaryngologists, particularly those with smaller hands and shorter height. Partnering with industry, we must address the needs of an increasingly diverse workforce to ensure that all surgeons can operate effectively and comfortably.

Retention and critical outcomes among new methadone maintenance patients following extended take-home reforms: a retrospective observational cohort study.

Background: Approximately 1800 opioid treatment programs (OTPs) in the US dispense methadone to upwards of 400,000 patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) annually, operating under longstanding highly restrictive guidelines. OTPs were granted novel flexibilities beginning March 15, 2020, allowing for reduced visit frequency and extended take-home doses to minimize COVID exposure with great variation across states and sites. We sought to use electronic health records to compare retention in treatment, opioid use, and adverse events among patients newly entering methadone maintenance in the post-reform period in comparison with year-ago, unexposed, controls. Methods: Retrospective observational cohort study across 9 OTPs, geographically dispersed, in the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) Clinical Trials Network. Newly enrolled patients between April 15 and October 14, 2020 (post-COVID, reform period) v. March 15-September 14, 2019 (pre-COVID, control period) were assessed. The primary outcome was 6-month retention. Secondary outcomes were opioid use and adverse events including emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and overdose. Findings: 821 individuals were newly admitted in the post-COVID and year-ago control periods, average age of 38.3 (SD 11.1), 58.9% male. The only difference across pre- and post-reform groups was the prevalence of psychostimulant use disorder (25.7% vs 32.9%, p = 0.02). Retention was non-inferior (60.0% vs 60.1%) as were hazards of adverse events in the aggregate (X2 (1) = 0.55, p = 0.46) in the post-COVID period. However, rates of month-level opioid use were higher among post-COVID intakes compared to pre-COVID controls (64.8% vs 51.1%, p < 0.001). Moderator analyses accounting for stimulant use and site-level variation in take-home schedules did not change findings. Interpretation: Policies allowing for extended take-home schedules were not associated with worse retention or adverse events despite slightly elevated rates of measured opioid use while in care. Relaxed guidelines were not associated with measurable increased harms and findings could inform future studies with prospective trials. Funding: USDHHSNIDACTNUG1DA013035-15.

Female Surgical Ergonomics in Otolaryngology: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the surgical ergonomic challenges experienced by women in otolaryngology, identify specific equipment that is ergonomically challenging, and assess the impact of suboptimal ergonomics on female otolaryngologists. METHODS: We performed a qualitative study using an interpretive framework rooted in grounded theory. We performed semi-structured qualitative interviews of 14 female otolaryngologists from nine institutions at various stages in training and across subspecialties. Interviews were independently analyzed by thematic content analysis by two researchers and inter-rater reliability was assessed via Cohen's kappa. Differing opinions were reconciled via discussion. RESULTS: Participants noted difficulties with equipment including microscopes, chairs, step stools, and tables as well as difficulty using larger surgical instruments, preference for smaller instruments, frustration with lack of smaller instruments, and a desire for a larger spectrum of instrument sizes. Participants reported neck, hand, and back pain associated with operating. Participants suggested modifications to the operative environment, including a wider variety of instrument sizes, adjustable instruments, and more focus and attention on ergonomic issues and the range of surgeon physiques. Participants felt that optimizing their operating room set-up was an additional burden on them, and that lack of inclusive instrumentation affected their sense of belonging. Participants emphasized positive stories of mentorship and empowerment from peers and superiors of all genders. CONCLUSION: Female otolaryngologists face unique ergonomic challenges. As the otolaryngology workforce becomes increasingly diverse, it is important to address the needs of a diverse set of physiques to avoid inadvertently disadvantaging certain individuals. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A Laryngoscope, 133:3034-3041, 2023.