Correction to: Evaluating the effectiveness of adjuvant radiotherapy in addition to surgery versus surgery alone at improving oncologic outcomes for early stage buccal carcinoma: a systematic review.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported that one of the authors' names was spelled incorrectly. In this Correction the incorrect and correct author name are shown. The original publication of this article has been corrected.

Evaluating the effectiveness of adjuvant radiotherapy in addition to surgery versus surgery alone at improving oncologic outcomes for early stage buccal carcinoma: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the evidence to evaluate oncologic outcomes for patients with early stage buccal squamous cell carcinoma treated with surgery versus surgery and adjuvant radiation therapy. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MedLine, EMBASE, Google Scholar, PubMed. REVIEW METHODS: The primary purpose was to perform a systematic review to determine the published literature comparing oncologic outcomes of patients with early stage (Stages I&II) buccal mucosal squamous cell carcinoma, treated with surgical resection alone versus surgery plus adjuvant radiation therapy. Oncologic outcomes of interest were overall survival, locoregional recurrence, and disease specific survival. The secondary aim was to perform a meta-analysis to quantitively compare and summarize the data on oncologic outcomes between treatments. RESULTS: A total of 1457 studies were screened and five retrospective cohort studies (n = 733 patients) were eligible for quantitative analysis. Overall study quality was moderate to high. Pooled relative risk ratios using a fixed effects model did not reveal any statistically significant difference in overall survival (p = 0.70) or locoregional recurrence rates (p = 0.72) in Stage I and II disease. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate there is sparse evidence comparing oncologic outcomes for early stage buccal squamous cell carcinoma treated with surgery alone versus surgery and adjuvant radiation therapy. Our findings based on a limited body of evidence suggest no obvious benefit in the addition of adjuvant radiation therapy, however robust randomized trials are warranted to reach firm conclusions.

Otolaryngology exposure in a longitudinal integrated clerkship setting.

BACKGROUND: Although 20-40% of primary care complaints are Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (OtoHNS) related, little emphasis is placed on OtoHNS instruction at the undergraduate medical education level. An OtoHNS clerkship rotation is not required at most Canadian medical schools. Furthermore, at institutions offering an OtoHNS rotation, less than 20% of students are able to complete a placement. Given that a large percentage of medical students in Canada will pursue primary care as a career, there remains a gap in providing OtoHNS clinical training. During the longitudinal integrated clerkship at the Northern Ontario School of Medicine (NOSM), students are assigned to one of 14 sites, and not all have access to an otolaryngologist. This study looks to quantify the level of exposure students are receiving in OtoHNS at NOSM and to assess their comfort level with diagnosing and treating common otolaryngologic conditions. METHODS: A structured 13-item survey was administered to second, third and fourth year medical students at NOSM. RESULTS: A majority (67.9%) of medical students surveyed had not observed an otolaryngologist. Furthermore, most students (90.6%) reported receiving very little OtoHNS classroom based and clinical instruction during medical school. CONCLUSIONS: A discrepancy exists between the quantity and breadth of OtoHNS training received in undergraduate medical education and the volume of OtoHNS encounters in primary care practice. Although geographic dissemination of students in the distributed learning model may be a challenge, strategies such as standardized objectives and supplemental electronic resources may serve to solidify clinical knowledge.