Medical Student Research Activity in Otolaryngology.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate medical student research productivity by institutions associated with otolaryngology residency programs and identify correlates of productivity. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. SETTING: N/A. METHODS: A systematic search for articles indexed on PubMed published by 116 programs from January 1, 2016 to February 28, 2021 was conducted. Primary outcomes were number of faculty publications, first-author medical student publications and medical students from each institution. Secondary outcomes included geographic region, number of otolaryngology faculty members, and program rankings. RESULTS: Nationally, the mean number of faculty per institution was 21.7 at the time of search. Over a 5-year period, there was a mean 98.7 total publications and 15.8 medical student first-author publications per institution consisting of a mean of 10.03 distinct medical students. One-way analysis of variance showed no statistically significant difference in medical student productivity (P = .09) or department size (P = .12) between regions. Number of medical student first-author publications positively correlated to number of faculty (R = .43, P < .05) and number of faculty publications (R = .63, P < .05). The top 30 programs ranked by United States News & World Report or National Institute of Health for funding had a statistically significantly greater mean number of medical student first-author publications and distinct medical student first authors than all other programs (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Greater numbers of faculty members likely provide more mentorship and opportunities that allow medical students to engage in projects that lead to first-author publications. These findings allow institutions to reflect on efforts in medical student engagement and provide data to students for career planning.

Evaluation of coagulopathy in cirrhotic patients: A scoping review of the utility of viscoelastic testing.

BACKGROUND: Cirrhosis causes significant coagulopathy. Traditional coagulation tests may not accurately measure coagulopathy in well-compensated patients with cirrhosis. Viscoelastic tests are functional tests that may better assess coagulopathy in cirrhotic patients. METHODS: We searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and grey literature using terms meaning viscoelastic testing and cirrhosis. After reviewing over 500 titles and abstracts, 40 full-text papers met inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Twenty-two papers found viscoelastic testing was a better indicator of baseline coagulation than traditional testing in cirrhosis. Nineteen additional papers evaluated the utility of peri-procedural viscoelastic testing and found they led to a reduction in blood product administration without increasing risk of hemorrhage, thrombotic events, or other complications. CONCLUSIONS: The usage of viscoelastic testing in patients with cirrhosis allows for better assessment of coagulopathy, resulting in improved outcomes. Educating physicians to optimize care of this high-risk group is necessary to further improve their treatment.