Invasive fungal sinusitis: A comparison of pediatric versus adult cases.

BACKGROUND: Invasive fungal sinusitis (IFS) is a rare infection with high mortality, mainly impacting immunocompromised patients. Given its significant mortality, timely recognition and treatment is crucial. This study aims to highlight the differences in presentation of IFS between pediatric and adult patients to aid in prompt diagnosis and treatment of this condition. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Global Index Medicus, Global Health (EBSCO) and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was conducted to identify articles relating to IFS. Patient demographics, comorbidities, presentation, disease characteristics, treatments and outcomes were extracted from the studies, and statistical analyses were conducted to compare these variables between pediatric and adult patients. RESULTS: 111 studies identified 22 pediatric and 132 adult patients worldwide. Children were more likely to have hematologic malignancies compared to adults (59.1 % vs. 15.2 %, p < 0.001). Facial symptoms such as pain, edema, and numbness were the most common symptoms for both age groups. In the pediatric population, fever and nasal or oral mucosal lesions were more common presenting symptoms (both p < 0.001). Pediatric patients were more likely to present without disease extension beyond the sinuses (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in either medication treatment or mortality between the two cohorts. CONCLUSION: IFS often presents with non-specific symptoms and a unique presentation in pediatric and adult populations. Clinical awareness of the varying presentations in both populations is important to treat in a timely manner given the rapid progression and high mortality rates of IFS.

A New Patient-reported Outcomes Measure for Surgically Treated Epiphora: Tearing Assessment and Rating Scale-12 (TEARS-12).

BACKGROUND: No widely accepted, validated instrument currently exists to measure clinical outcomes in patients who undergo dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) for treatment of epiphora. OBJECTIVE: To develop a patient-reported outcome measure applicable to this population. METHODS: Psychometric evaluations, consultation with experts, and review of the literature informed item generation of a 12-question questionnaire to incorporate the most relevant symptoms experienced by patients with nasolacrimal duct obstruction. This questionnaire, known as the Tearing Assessment and Rating Scale-12 (TEARS-12), was administered to 32 patients before and after intervention, in the form of endoscopic DCR. Statistical analysis was performed to measure internal consistency, responsiveness, and test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Pre-operative and post-operative TEARS-12 scores (28.2 [standard error (SE) 3.19] vs 11.8 [SE 3.25], respectively, P = 0.001) demonstrated improved patient outcome within 6 weeks following endoscopic DCR. Cronbach's alpha for the questionnaire was 0.90, indicating high overall reliability. Additionally, each question demonstrated internal reliability, with a corrected item-total correlation greater than 0.30. The intraclass correlation between the two pre-operative scores was 0.858 (P < 0.001), indicating high test-retest reliability. CONCLUSION: TEARS-12 is a statistically valid, easy-to-administer instrument to measure clinical outcomes in patients who undergo endoscopic DCR.

Assessing ChatGPT's Responses to Otolaryngology Patient Questions.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate ChatGPT's performance in addressing real-world otolaryngology patient questions, focusing on accuracy, comprehensiveness, and patient safety, to assess its suitability for integration into healthcare. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted using patient questions from the public online forum Reddit's r/AskDocs, where medical advice is sought from healthcare professionals. Patient questions were input into ChatGPT (GPT-3.5), and responses were reviewed by 5 board-certified otolaryngologists. The evaluation criteria included difficulty, accuracy, comprehensiveness, and bedside manner/empathy. Statistical analysis explored the relationship between patient question characteristics and ChatGPT response scores. Potentially dangerous responses were also identified. RESULTS: Patient questions averaged 224.93 words, while ChatGPT responses were longer at 414.93 words. The accuracy scores for ChatGPT responses were 3.76/5, comprehensiveness scores were 3.59/5, and bedside manner/empathy scores were 4.28/5. Longer patient questions did not correlate with higher response ratings. However, longer ChatGPT responses scored higher in bedside manner/empathy. Higher question difficulty correlated with lower comprehensiveness. Five responses were flagged as potentially dangerous. CONCLUSION: While ChatGPT exhibits promise in addressing otolaryngology patient questions, this study demonstrates its limitations, particularly in accuracy and comprehensiveness. The identification of potentially dangerous responses underscores the need for a cautious approach to AI in medical advice. Responsible integration of AI into healthcare necessitates thorough assessments of model performance and ethical considerations for patient safety.