Indications for absorbable steroid-eluting sinus implants: Viewpoint via the Delphi method.

Absorbable steroid-eluting sinus implants provide targeted corticosteroid release over a sustained period and are designed to prevent both undesirable adhesion formation and sinus ostia restenosis. Here, we highlight the key evidence of these implants to date and query a group of experts via a Delphi process on the indications and optimal timing for intraoperative or in-office placement of these implants. Six of a total of 12 statements reached consensus and were accepted. Overall, experts largely agree that intraoperative or in-office use of steroid-eluting stents could be considered for patients: (1) who are diabetic or intolerant of oral steroids, (2) undergoing extended frontal sinus surgery, and (3) with recurrent stenosis. Given the lack of expert consensus on other key statements, clinicians should carefully consider these treatment options on a case-by-case basis after shared decision-making.

Continuation of telemedicine in otolaryngology post-COVID-19: Applications by subspecialty.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to review the literature and compile key clinically relevant applications of telemedicine for use in otolaryngology relevant to the post-COVID-19 era. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic Literature Review. DATA SOURCES: Pubmed and Google Scholar. REVIEW METHODS: Pubmed and Google Scholar were queried using combined key words such as "telemedicine," "covid" and "otolaryngology." The searches were completed in March-August 2020. Additional queries were made with particular subspecialty phrases such as "rhinology" or "otology" to maximize yield of relevant titles. Relevant articles were selected for abstract review. Applicable abstracts were then selected for review of the full text. RESULTS: Initial search identified 279 results. These were screened for relevance and 100 abstracts were selected for review. Abstracts were excluded if they were not in English, not related to otolaryngology, or if the full text was unavailable for access. Of these, 37 articles were selected for complete review of the full text. CONCLUSION: The sudden healthcare closures during the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a sharp increase in the use of telemedicine, particularly in subspecialty fields. Otolaryngologists are at a unique risk of infection resulting from the examination of the head and neck and aerosol-generating procedures due to the predilection of viral particles for the nasal cavities and pharynx. The COVID-19 pandemic may have served as a catalyst to implement telemedicine into clinical practice, however identifying ways to integrate telemedicine long term is key for a sustainable and viable practice in the post-COVID-19 era. Although many states are now finding themselves on the down-sloping side of their infection rate curve, many others remain at the apex. Additionally, the risk of future waves of this pandemic, or the onset of another pandemic, should not be overlooked. Practice modification guidelines that mitigate infection risk by utilizing telemedicine would be useful in these instances. Telemedicine can help to reduce infection spread by limiting unnecessary in-person interactions and help conserve personal protective equipment (PPE) by facilitating remote care with the added benefits of expanding care to broad geographic areas, limiting cost, time, and travel burden on patients and families, and enabling consistent follow up.

The Impact of the Pandemic on Otolaryngology Patients With Negative COVID-19 Status: Commentary and Insights From Orbital Emergencies.

Efforts aimed at minimizing the spread of COVID-19 and "flattening the curve" may be affecting clinical care delivery for non-COVID-19 cases that include otolaryngologic and orbital conditions. We are witnessing changes in the manner that patients present, as well as modifications in clinical management strategies. An improved understanding of these phenomena and the contributing factors is essential for otolaryngologists to provide sound clinical care during this unprecedented pandemic.

Clinical Consensus Statement: Balloon Dilation of the Eustachian Tube.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a clinical consensus statement on the use of balloon dilation of the eustachian tube (BDET). METHODS: An expert panel of otolaryngologists was assembled with nominated representatives of general otolaryngology and relevant subspecialty societies. The target population was adults 18 years or older who are candidates for BDET because of obstructive eustachian tube dysfunction (OETD) in 1 or both ears for 3 months or longer that significantly affects quality of life or functional health status. A modified Delphi method was used to distill expert opinion into clinical statements that met a standardized definition of consensus. RESULTS: After 3 iterative Delphi method surveys, 28 statements met the predefined criteria for consensus, while 28 statements did not. The clinical statements were grouped into 3 categories for the purposes of presentation and discussion: (1) patient criteria, (2) perioperative considerations, and (3) outcomes. CONCLUSION: This panel reached consensus on several statements that clarify diagnosis and perioperative management of OETD. Lack of consensus on other statements likely reflects knowledge gaps regarding the role of BDET in managing OETD. Expert panel consensus may provide helpful information for the otolaryngologist considering the use of BDET for the management of patients with OETD.

A framework for quality measurement in the presurgical care of chronic rhinosinusitis: a review from the Quality Improvement Committee of the American Rhinologic Society.

BACKGROUND: Quality improvement (QI) in the management of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is garnering increasing attention. Defining frameworks and metrics to assess the quality of key components in CRS management could assist in reducing unwarranted practice variation and increase high-quality care. METHODS: A panel of the American Rhinologic Society (ARS) QI committee reviewed the literature to determine important presurgical components of CRS care that warrant QI. The evidence was organized into 4 categories: (1) diagnosis, (2) medical management, (3) appropriate patient selection for surgery, and (4) patient-centered discussion. The combination of these categories was used to develop a framework termed the CRS Appropriate Presurgical Algorithm (CAPA). RESULTS: Prior to offering surgery for CRS, the best available evidence support the following quality metrics: (1) a guideline-based diagnosis should be confirmed; (2) appropriate medical management, including a minimum of topical corticosteroid therapy and saline irrigations, should have been attempted (assuming patient tolerance); (3) a computed tomography (CT) scan should be obtained (to confirm the presence of sinus inflammation and for surgical planning); and (4) a patient-centered discussion regarding treatment options for refractory CRS (ie, alternative medical therapies vs surgery vs observation) while focusing on risks and benefits, the need for long-term medical compliance, and understanding of patient preferences and expectations. CONCLUSION: Defining metrics that assess key components to CRS care prior to offering surgery has the potential to further improve upon an already successful treatment paradigm, reduce unwarranted practice variation, and to ensure that patients are receiving a similar level of high-quality care.

Rhinology-specific priority setting for quality improvement: a modified Delphi study from the Quality Improvement Committee of the American Rhinologic Society.

BACKGROUND: Improving the quality of healthcare is a complex and resource intensive process. To optimize the allocation of scarce resources, quality improvement (QI) should focus on high-value diseases that will produce the largest improvement in health system performance. Given the breadth and multidisciplinary nature of sinonasal disease management, the purpose of this study was to transparently develop a prioritized list of sinonasal diseases for QI from the perspective of the specialty of rhinology and the American Rhinologic Society (ARS). METHODS: The RAND modified Delphi methodology was used to rank the priority of nine sinonasal disease categories from 1 (lowest priority) to 9 (highest priority). Two rounds of ranking along with a teleconference meeting was performed by a panel of 9 experts from the ARS Quality Improvement Committee. RESULTS: The final QI-prioritized list of sinonasal diseases are as follows: chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) (mean score = 8.9), recurrent acute rhinosinusitis (RARS) (mean score = 7.9), sinonasal neoplasms (mean score = 7.0), anatomic nasal obstruction (mean score = 5.9), refractory epistaxis (mean score = 5.2), complicated acute rhinosinusitis (mean score = 5.2), chronic nonallergic rhinitis (mean score = 4.4), orbital disease (mean score = 4.3), uncomplicated acute rhinosinusitis (mean score = 4.1), and allergy/allergic rhinitis (mean score = 3.7). CONCLUSION: The three most important disease categories for QI from the perspective of the specialty of rhinology were CRS, RARS, and sinonasal neoplasms. Future studies need to define and validate quality metrics for each of these important disease categories in order to facilitate appropriate measurement and improvement initiatives.

Quality measurement for rhinosinusitis: a review from the Quality Improvement Committee of the American Rhinologic Society.

BACKGROUND: Measuring quality outcomes is an important prerequisite to improve quality of care. Rhinosinusitis represents a high value target to improve quality of care because it has a high prevalence of disease, large economic burden, and large practice variation. In this study we review the current state of quality measurement for management of both acute (ARS) and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). METHODS: The major national quality metric repositories and clearinghouses were queried. Additional searches included the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery database, PubMed, and Google to attempt to capture any additional quality metrics. RESULTS: Seven quality metrics for ARS and 4 quality metrics for CRS were identified. ARS metrics focused on appropriateness of diagnosis (n = 1), antibiotic prescribing (n = 4), and radiologic imaging (n = 2). CRS quality metrics focused on appropriateness of diagnosis (n = 1), radiologic imaging (n = 1), and measurement of patient quality of life (n = 2). The Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) currently tracks 3 ARS quality metrics and 1 CRS quality metric. There are no outcome-based rhinosinusitis quality metrics and no metrics that assess domains of safety, patient-centeredness, and timeliness of care. CONCLUSIONS: The current status of quality measurement for rhinosinusitis has focused primarily on the quality domain of efficiency and process measures for ARS. More work is needed to develop, validate, and track outcome-based quality metrics along with CRS-specific metrics. Although there has been excellent work done to improve quality measurement for rhinosinusitis, there remain major gaps and challenges that need to be considered during the development of future metrics.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Improving Nasal Form and Function after Rhinoplasty.

Objective Rhinoplasty, a surgical procedure that alters the shape or appearance of the nose while preserving or enhancing the nasal airway, ranks among the most commonly performed cosmetic procedures in the United States, with >200,000 procedures reported in 2014. While it is difficult to calculate the exact economic burden incurred by rhinoplasty patients following surgery with or without complications, the average rhinoplasty procedure typically exceeds $4000. The costs incurred due to complications, infections, or revision surgery may include the cost of long-term antibiotics, hospitalization, or lost revenue from hours/days of missed work. The resultant psychological impact of rhinoplasty can also be significant. Furthermore, the health care burden from psychological pressures of nasal deformities/aesthetic shortcomings, surgical infections, surgical pain, side effects from antibiotics, and nasal packing materials must also be considered for these patients. Prior to this guideline, limited literature existed on standard care considerations for pre- and postsurgical management and for standard surgical practice to ensure optimal outcomes for patients undergoing rhinoplasty. The impetus for this guideline is to utilize current evidence-based medicine practices and data to build unanimity regarding the peri- and postoperative strategies to maximize patient safety and to optimize surgical results for patients. Purpose The primary purpose of this guideline is to provide evidence-based recommendations for clinicians who either perform rhinoplasty or are involved in the care of a rhinoplasty candidate, as well as to optimize patient care, promote effective diagnosis and therapy, and reduce harmful or unnecessary variations in care. The target audience is any clinician or individual, in any setting, involved in the management of these patients. The target patient population is all patients aged ≥15 years. The guideline is intended to focus on knowledge gaps, practice variations, and clinical concerns associated with this surgical procedure; it is not intended to be a comprehensive reference for improving nasal form and function after rhinoplasty. Recommendations in this guideline concerning education and counseling to the patient are also intended to include the caregiver if the patient is <18 years of age. Action Statements The Guideline Development Group made the following recommendations: (1) Clinicians should ask all patients seeking rhinoplasty about their motivations for surgery and their expectations for outcomes, should provide feedback on whether those expectations are a realistic goal of surgery, and should document this discussion in the medical record. (2) Clinicians should assess rhinoplasty candidates for comorbid conditions that could modify or contraindicate surgery, including obstructive sleep apnea, body dysmorphic disorder, bleeding disorders, or chronic use of topical vasoconstrictive intranasal drugs. (3) The surgeon, or the surgeon's designee, should evaluate the rhinoplasty candidate for nasal airway obstruction during the preoperative assessment. (4) The surgeon, or the surgeon's designee, should educate rhinoplasty candidates regarding what to expect after surgery, how surgery might affect the ability to breathe through the nose, potential complications of surgery, and the possible need for future nasal surgery. (5) The clinician, or the clinician's designee, should counsel rhinoplasty candidates with documented obstructive sleep apnea about the impact of surgery on nasal airway obstruction and how obstructive sleep apnea might affect perioperative management. (6) The surgeon, or the surgeon's designee, should educate rhinoplasty patients before surgery about strategies to manage discomfort after surgery. (7) Clinicians should document patients' satisfaction with their nasal appearance and with their nasal function at a minimum of 12 months after rhinoplasty. The Guideline Development Group made recommendations against certain actions: (1) When a surgeon, or the surgeon's designee, chooses to administer perioperative antibiotics for rhinoplasty, he or she should not routinely prescribe antibiotic therapy for a duration >24 hours after surgery. (2) Surgeons should not routinely place packing in the nasal cavity of rhinoplasty patients (with or without septoplasty) at the conclusion of surgery. The panel group made the following statement an option: (1) The surgeon, or the surgeon's designee, may administer perioperative systemic steroids to the rhinoplasty patient.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Improving Nasal Form and Function after Rhinoplasty Executive Summary.

Objective Rhinoplasty, a surgical procedure that alters the shape or appearance of the nose while preserving or enhancing the nasal airway, ranks among the most commonly performed cosmetic procedures in the United States, with >200,000 procedures reported in 2014. While it is difficult to calculate the exact economic burden incurred by rhinoplasty patients following surgery with or without complications, the average rhinoplasty procedure typically exceeds $4000. The costs incurred due to complications, infections, or revision surgery may include the cost of long-term antibiotics, hospitalization, or lost revenue from hours/days of missed work. The resultant psychological impact of rhinoplasty can also be significant. Furthermore, the health care burden from psychological pressures of nasal deformities/aesthetic shortcomings, surgical infections, surgical pain, side effects from antibiotics, and nasal packing materials must also be considered for these patients. Prior to this guideline, limited literature existed on standard care considerations for pre- and postsurgical management and for standard surgical practice to ensure optimal outcomes for patients undergoing rhinoplasty. The impetus for this guideline is to utilize current evidence-based medicine practices and data to build unanimity regarding the peri- and postoperative strategies to maximize patient safety and to optimize surgical results for patients. Purpose The primary purpose of this guideline executive summary is to provide evidence-based recommendations for clinicians who either perform rhinoplasty or are involved in the care of a rhinoplasty candidate, as well as to optimize patient care, promote effective diagnosis and therapy, and reduce harmful or unnecessary variations in care. The target audience is any clinician or individual, in any setting, involved in the management of these patients. The target patient population is all patients aged ≥15 years. The guideline is intended to focus on knowledge gaps, practice variations, and clinical concerns associated with this surgical procedure; it is not intended to be a comprehensive reference for improving nasal form and function after rhinoplasty. Recommendations in this guideline concerning education and counseling to the patient are intended to include the caregiver if the patient is <18 years of age. Action Statements The Guideline Development Group made the following recommendations: (1) Clinicians should ask all patients seeking rhinoplasty about their motivations for surgery and their expectations for outcomes, should provide feedback on whether those expectations are a realistic goal of surgery, and should document this discussion in the medical record. (2) Clinicians should assess rhinoplasty candidates for comorbid conditions that could modify or contraindicate surgery, including obstructive sleep apnea, body dysmorphic disorder, bleeding disorders, or chronic use of topical vasoconstrictive intranasal drugs. (3) The surgeon, or the surgeon's designee, should evaluate the rhinoplasty candidate for nasal airway obstruction during the preoperative assessment. (4) The surgeon, or the surgeon's designee, should educate rhinoplasty candidates regarding what to expect after surgery, how surgery might affect the ability to breathe through the nose, potential complications of surgery, and the possible need for future nasal surgery. (5) The clinician, or the clinician's designee, should counsel rhinoplasty candidates with documented obstructive sleep apnea about the impact of surgery on nasal airway obstruction and how obstructive sleep apnea might affect perioperative management. (6) The surgeon, or the surgeon's designee, should educate rhinoplasty patients before surgery about strategies to manage discomfort after surgery. (7) Clinicians should document patient satisfaction with their nasal appearance and with their nasal function at a minimum of 12 months after rhinoplasty. The guideline development group made recommendations against certain actions: (1) When a surgeon, or the surgeon's designee, chooses to administer perioperative antibiotics for rhinoplasty, he or she should not routinely prescribe antibiotic therapy for a duration >24 hours after surgery. (2) Surgeons should not routinely place packing in the nasal cavity of rhinoplasty patients (with or without septoplasty) at the conclusion of surgery. The panel group made the following statement an option: (1) The surgeon, or the surgeon's designee, may administer perioperative systemic steroids to the rhinoplasty patient.

Overview of Sinonasal and Ventral Skull Base Malignancy Management.

Significant technological advances have fostered a movement toward minimally invasive surgical interventions for the management of ventral skull base malignancies. The care of patients with these lesions ideally involves an interdisciplinary skull base team that includes otolaryngologists, neurologic surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. This article describes considerations essential for diagnosis, prognosis, and preoperative evaluation. Furthermore, surgical nuances, strategies for skull base reconstruction, and nonsurgical options are briefly discussed. This overview may be useful as an up-to-date description of the challenging clinical scenarios associated with these lesions.

Are industry financial ties associated with greater scholarly impact among academic otolaryngologists?

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: In response to concerns regarding physician-industry relationships, the Physician Sunshine Act of 2010 was passed in an effort to increase transparency and accountability. Our objective was to determine whether there is an association between industry support and scholarly impact among academic otolaryngologists. METHODS: Faculty listings, academic rank, and fellowship training of academic otolaryngologists were accessed from departmental websites. H-indices, number of publications, and publication range (years) of each individual were calculated using the Scopus database. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Open Payments database was used to determine industry payments during 2014 to each otolaryngologist. RESULTS: Of 1,515 otolaryngologists, 65.4% received industry support and 15.8% received support > $1,000. No difference in impact, as measured by the h-index, was noted upon comparison of those receiving support and those who did not (P > 0.05). Individuals receiving > $1,000 had higher h-indices and total publications than those receiving < $1,000 or receiving no support (H = 17.8 vs. 10.9, P < 0.0001), even upon controlling for academic seniority. Upon organization by subspecialty, individuals receiving > $1,000 had greater scholarly impact among most subspecialties. Industry contributions increased with advancing experience. CONCLUSION: Receiving industry contributions greater than $1,000 is associated with greater scholarly impact among academic otolaryngologists. In a smaller surgical specialty, such as otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, direct industry research support-as well as indirect contributions through the support of educational programs, consulting, and other expenses-potentially impacts scholarly discourse; these findings do not reflect a causal relationship and may require further characterization. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 127:87-94, 2017.

Preventing and Managing Complications in Frontal Sinus Surgery.

This review covers potential complications of frontal sinus surgical management and strategies for prevention of these complications. Accordingly, recent advances in frontal sinus surgical techniques are described, and the management of complications stemming both from these and traditional techniques are detailed.

Overview of Frontal Sinus Pathology and Management.

The frontal sinus is the most complex of all paranasal sinuses. Given its proximity to the cranial vault and orbit, frontal sinus pathology can progress to involve these structures and lead to significant morbidity, or even mortality. Surgical management of the frontal sinus is technically challenging. Various open and endoscopic surgical techniques are available to the otolaryngologist. This article presents an overview of the major disease entities that affect the frontal sinus, with a special emphasis on treatment principles and surgical management.

Clinical Consensus Statement: Septoplasty with or without Inferior Turbinate Reduction.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a clinical consensus statement on septoplasty with or without inferior turbinate reduction. METHODS: An expert panel of otolaryngologists with no relevant conflicts of interest was assembled to represent general otolaryngology and relevant subspecialty societies. A working definition of septoplasty with or without inferior turbinate reduction and the scope of pertinent otolaryngologic practice were first established. Patients 18 years and older were defined as the targeted population of interest. A modified Delphi method was then used to distill expert opinion into clinical statements that met a standardized definition of consensus. RESULTS: The group defined nasal septoplasty as a surgical procedure designed to correct a deviated nasal septum for the purpose of improving nasal function, form, or both. After 2 iterative Delphi method surveys, 20 statements met the standardized definition of consensus, while 13 statements did not. The clinical statements were grouped into 8 categories for presentation and discussion: (1) definition and diagnosis, (2) imaging studies, (3) medical management prior to septoplasty, (4) perioperative management, (5) surgical considerations, (6) adjuvant procedures, (7) postoperative care, and (8) outcomes. CONCLUSION: This clinical consensus statement was developed by and for otolaryngologists and is intended to promote appropriate and, when possible, evidence-based care for patients undergoing septoplasty with or without inferior turbinate reduction. A complete definition of septoplasty with or without inferior turbinate reduction was first developed, and additional statements were subsequently produced and evaluated addressing diagnosis, medical management prior to septoplasty, and surgical considerations, as well as the appropriate role of perioperative, postoperative, and adjuvant procedures, in addition to outcomes. Additionally, a series of clinical statements were developed, such as "Computed tomography scan may not accurately demonstrate the degree of septal deviation," "Septoplasty can assist delivery of intranasal medications to the nasal cavity," "Endoscopy can be used to improve visualization of posterior-based septal deviation during septoplasty," and "Quilting sutures can obviate the need for nasal packing after septoplasty." It is anticipated that the application of these principles will result in decreased variations in the care of septoplasty patients and an increase in the quality of care.

Computed tomography imaging practice patterns in adult chronic rhinosinusitis: survey of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery and American Rhinologic Society membership.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to assess the current practice patterns of computed tomography (CT) imaging for diagnosis and management of adult chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). METHODS: A 29-item, electronic, Web-based physician survey was disseminated to the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (AAO-HNS) and American Rhinologic Society (ARS) membership from November 2012 to January 2013. RESULTS: A total of 331 otolaryngologists completed the survey. Seventy-five percent of respondents did not obtain confirmatory CT imaging prior to initiating medical therapy for CRS. A typical diagnostic scan was considered to be a 3-mm coronal CT with or without 3-mm axial images for 50.6% of participants. On average, the respondents obtained 1 (58.8%) or 2 (36.6%) CT scans prior to proceeding with sinus surgery. CT scanning was most commonly performed in a hospital radiology department (76.4%), followed by a free-standing imaging center (44.5%). An in-office CT scanner was owned by 24.5% of the respondents, mostly commonly a cone beam CT (74.0%) scanner. Most respondents (87.1%) did not experience problems with carriers denying ability to image or reimbursing for scans. Overall, 68.4% of the respondents were unaware of the dosage of radiation delivered by the scanner used for CT acquisition. CONCLUSION: This survey provides a snapshot of the current utility of CT imaging in the management paradigm for CRS. Given that most are unaware of the delivered radiation dose, this clearly represents an important area of improvement in the knowledge gap.

Voicing an impact: who does the National Institutes of Health support for voice disorder research?

PURPOSE: Interest in a variety of neoplastic, functional, neurological, and age-related laryngeal disorders has contributed to the development of laryngology as an established subspecialty. Funding support plays a critical role in facilitating scholarship within the field. Our objectives were to evaluate who is receiving funding from the NIH for topics relevant to voice disorders, and further describe temporal trends in grants awarded. METHODS: The NIH RePORTER database was searched for grants relevant to voice disorders. Data were further organized by PI specialty, academic department, and funding totals. Furthermore, PI scholarly impact, as measured by the h-index, was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 830 funded fiscal years (for 232 unique projects) totaling $203 million have supported projects examining voice disorders. A plurality of projects (32.8%) was awarded to PIs in otolaryngology departments, followed by 17.2% to speech pathology/communication sciences departments. Although year-to-year variation was noted, otolaryngology departments received approximately 15% of funding annually. Funded otolaryngologists had similar scholarly impact values to individuals in other specialties. CONCLUSIONS: The study of voice disorders involves an interdisciplinary approach, as PIs in numerous specialties receive NIH funding support. As they receive a considerable proportion of this funding and had similar h-indices compared to other specialties involved, otolaryngologists have just as much scholarly impact despite being a smaller specialty. As speech and language pathologists also comprised a significant proportion of individuals in this analysis, enhanced cooperation and encouragement of interdisciplinary scholarly initiatives may be beneficial.

Geographic and temporal trends in frontal sinus surgery.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate geographic and temporal trends in frontal sinus surgery procedures. METHODS: Medicare Part B data files from 2000 to 2011 were examined for temporal trends in various frontal sinus procedures, and the most recent year containing geographic information (2010) was evaluated for Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code use. Additionally, nationwide charges per procedure were recorded. Regional populations of individuals ≥ 65 years old were obtained from the 2010 U.S. Census, and surgical society websites were used to determine the number of practicing rhinologists and otolaryngologists in each region. RESULTS: The use of open approaches declined by one third, while endoscopic procedures went from 6463 to 19262 annually, with the most marked increases occurring from 2006 through 2011. Geographic variation was noted, with practitioners in the South Atlantic states performing the greatest number of endoscopic procedures in 2010, whereas the East South Central states had the greatest number when controlling for population. There was an inverse relationship between endoscopic procedures performed and number of fellowship-trained rhinologists (controlling for regional populations) (R(2) = 0.66). The first year frontal sinus ballooning had a unique CPT code illustrated decreased reimbursements for non-balloon endoscopic surgery ($609) relative to balloon approaches ($2635). CONCLUSION: Declines in open frontal sinus surgery and marked increases in endoscopic approaches have potential implications for residency training. Potential reasons for marked increases in endoscopic approaches include the rising popularity of balloon technologies, although this is speculative. Geographic variation exists in frontal sinus surgery patterns, including an inverse relationship between endoscopic approaches and the number of fellowship-trained rhinologists.

Expert witness testimony guidelines: identifying areas for improvement.

Expert witnesses play an invaluable, if controversial, role by deciphering medical events for juries in cases of alleged negligence. We review expert witness guidelines among major surgical societies and identify gaps within these standards, as our hope is that this spurs discussion addressing areas for improvement. Of 8 surgical societies with accessible guidelines, none included specific compensation guidelines or limits, detailed reporting mechanisms regarding unethical behavior by legal professionals, or addressed the appropriateness of testifying frequently and exclusively for one side. Several processes possibly deterring grossly inaccurate testimony have been adopted by other surgical societies and should potentially be addressed by the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery. These include offering an expert witness testimony certification path, strengthening the formalized grievance process, and encouraging members to sign an affirmation statement.