Morbidity after tonsillectomy in children with autism spectrum disorders.

OBJECTIVES: As the incidence of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) increases, otolaryngologists are more likely to encounter patients from this population during tonsillectomy. The purpose of this study was to examine whether outcomes differ between pediatric patients with and without ASD in a national cohort of children undergoing tonsillectomy. Understanding these differences may be used to inform future approaches to improve clinical outcomes and healthcare costs. METHODS: Data for this study were obtained from the Kids Inpatient Database (KID) of the Healthcare Cost Utilization Project. We studied pediatric patients who underwent tonsillectomy during 2003, 2006, 2009, and 2012. Tonsillectomy was identified using ICD-9-CM diagnosis codes 28.2 (tonsillectomy without adenoidectomy) and 28.3 (tonsillectomy with adenoidectomy). ASD was identified using ICD-9-CM diagnosis code 299 (autism). Outcomes including complications, length of hospital stay, and total hospitalization costs. Analyses were performed using multivariable models. Propensity score matching was used to control for covariate imbalance between patients with and without ASD. RESULTS: In our sample of 27,040 patients, 322 (1.2%) had a diagnosis of ASD. After controlling for potential confounders, multivariable modeling suggested patients with ASD had a shorter LOS of 0.50 days (p < 0.0001), were less likely to experience complications (odds ratio 0.57, p = 0.001), and had lower associated costs of $1308 less (p < 0.0001). Propensity score matching confirmed the findings of the multivariable modeling. CONCLUSION: Although ASD alone does not appear to confer additional costs or morbidity, differences between children with and without ASD suggest the need for providers to address patients with ASD uniquely.

Decisional regret following ventilation tube insertion.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to see if parental regret following ventilation tube (VT) insertion was related to non-resolution of ear infections and thus ongoing need for otolaryngological care and VT reinsertion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All consecutive parents presenting with children who had VT in place were given a validated regret survey and asked the reason for their visit. Chart review was used for medical history. RESULTS: Two hundred and ten respondents were included. The children involved had a mean age of 5.2 years, 63.3% were male, and mean number of years since first VT insertion was 1.12 with a range of 0.04-9.28 years. 70.5% had a regret score of 0, with mean score 6.98 (95%CI 5.11-8.85). Scores were significantly higher for parents who presented their child with an ear complaint such as otorrhea (15.52, 95%CI 7.67-23.37, p = 0.004). Parents whose children had a history of reflux had significantly lower regret scores than parents whose children did not have a history of reflux (3.33 versus 7.89, p = 0.007). Parental regret was unrelated to patient age, other comorbidities, indication for initial tube insertion, hearing status on the day of inquiry, number of sets of tubes, visits for otorrhea, prescriptions given for eardrops, clinic visits, or length of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Transient factors may influence decisional regret at any given time. For parents whose children receive VT, regret is not related to prolonged specialized ear care and need for VT reinsertion.

Identifying Potential Child Abuse through Oral Examination.

Limited reports of oropharyngeal trauma exist in the literature even though this type of injury is extremely common in pediatric populations. There are no widely agreed upon diagnostic and management tools for such injuries in abuse cases, emphasizing the importance of reporting rare cases of orofacial trauma. This case report of a soft palate laceration demonstrates an instance of initially unrecognized potential child abuse. We aim to clarify understanding of such injuries. Furthermore, the report highlights the need for recognition of oral signs of child abuse in order to promote early detection, reporting, and appropriate management.

Salivary cotinine levels in children with otolaryngological disorders.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if salivary cotinine, a biomarker for tobacco smoke exposure, is elevated more often or to a higher degree in children meeting criteria for tonsillectomy or tympanostomy tube insertion. METHODS: Saliva samples were obtained from 3 groups of children for salivary cotinine measurement. Group 1 served as healthy controls. Group 2 consisted of subjects meeting tympanostomy tube criteria. Group 3 consisted of patients meeting tonsillectomy criteria. Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure was defined as a salivary cotinine concentration ≥1.0 ng/mL. Demographic data, smoke exposure history, and co-morbidities were also determined. RESULTS: 331 patients were included, with 112 in Group 1, 111 in Group 2, and 108 in Group 3. No differences were encountered for smoke exposure by history or smoker's identity, salivary cotinine level, or frequency of positive cotinine results. 42.6% of Group 1 had positive salivary cotinine compared to 51.8% of Group 2 and 47.7% of Group 3. Group 1 had a mean salivary cotinine level of 2.42 ng/mL compared to 2.54 ng/mL in Group 2 and 2.60 ng/mL in Group 3. The frequency of positive cotinine levels was higher than expected based on parental history. Among subjects with positive cotinine levels, 93 had no ETS exposure, and 64 had ETS exposure by history. CONCLUSION: Approximately 50% of children who undergo tonsillectomy and tympanostomy tube insertion have objective evidence of ETS exposure. Parental history underestimates passive smoke exposure, which can impact perioperative care.