Parental Experiences With Access to Care for Obstructive Sleep-Disordered Breathing: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: Despite evidence-based guidelines for obstructive sleep-disordered breathing (SDB), recent studies continue to highlight treatment inequities. We used qualitative research methods to examine parental facilitators and barriers to SDB treatment. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative interviews. SETTING: Tertiary care center. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were conducted (January-April 2022) with parents of children with SDB who underwent tonsillectomies to understand the processes of SDB detection and accessing specialty care. Interviews were conducted until thematic saturation was reached and coded using NVivo software. RESULTS: Of the 17 parents who completed the key informant interviews, 6 (35%) were of non-Hispanic black race, and 3 (17.6%) interviews were conducted in Spanish. Parents noted that the more knowledge their primary care provider (PCP) had about SDB, the easier it was to obtain a diagnostic workup (41%). The most common barrier included difficulty obtaining a specialist (otolaryngology or sleep medicine) referral from their PCP and encountering providers who were dismissive of parent-reported symptoms related to SDB, leading them to seek a second opinion or self-refer (53%). Medicaid coverage was a strong facilitator to receipt of care (59%). Three (17.6%) parents noted alienation in the process due to racial bias or language barriers. CONCLUSION: Parental interviews revealed that facilitators of SDB treatment included high clinician knowledge and perceived importance of SDB as well as Medicaid insurance which decreased financial strain. Parents also cited the attainment of referrals as a significant barrier to obtaining specialty evaluation. These findings identify potential modifiable areas to tailor future interventions for timely and equitable SDB care.

Comparing Myringoplasty to Type I Tympanoplasty in Tympanic Membrane Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the anatomic success rates of type I tympanoplasty (tympanoplasty) versus myringoplasty. By our definition, tympanoplasty involves entering the middle ear via elevation of a tympanomeatal flap, while myringoplasty involves surgery to the drumhead without middle ear exposure. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane. REVIEW METHODS: To be included, studies must have documented surgical technique, tympanic membrane (TM) perforation size (as % of TM), and success rate using tissue or alloplastic grafts. Exclusion criteria included series with more than 10% of patients with cholesteatoma or middle ear pathology. A meta-analysis of weighted summary proportions under the random effects model was performed, and proportion differences (PD) were calculated. A secondary analysis of hearing outcomes was performed. RESULTS: Eighty-five studies met inclusion, with a tympanoplasty cohort of n = 7966 and n = 1759 for myringoplasty. For perforations, less than 50% of the TM, the success rate for tympanoplasty and myringoplasty was 90.2% and 91.4%, respectively (PD: 1.2%, p = .19). In perforations greater than 50%, tympanoplasty and myringoplasty success rates were 82.8% and 85.3%, respectively (PD: 2.5%, p = .29). For both procedures, perforations less than 50% of the TM had higher success rates than perforations greater than 50% of the TM (p < .01). Both techniques endorsed significant improvements to air-bone gap (ABG) metrics. CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests that the anatomic success rate is similar for tympanoplasty and myringoplasty, regardless of perforation size, and that smaller perforations experience higher success rates in both techniques. ABG outcomes were also similar between procedure techniques.