The Global Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Workforce.

Importance: A core component of delivering care of head and neck diseases is an adequate workforce. The World Health Organization report, Multi-Country Assessment of National Capacity to Provide Hearing Care, captured primary workforce estimates from 68 member states in 2012, noting that response rates were a limitation and that updated more comprehensive data are needed. Objective: To establish comprehensive workforce metrics for global otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) with updated data from more countries/territories. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cross-sectional electronic survey characterizing the OHNS workforce was disseminated from February 10 to June 22, 2022, to professional society leaders, medical licensing boards, public health officials, and practicing OHNS clinicians. Main Outcome: The OHNS workforce per capita, stratified by income and region. Results: Responses were collected from 121 of 195 countries/territories (62%). Survey responses specifically reported on OHNS workforce from 114 countries/territories representing 84% of the world's population. The global OHNS clinician density was 2.19 (range, 0-61.7) OHNS clinicians per 100 000 population. The OHNS clinician density varied by World Bank income group with higher-income countries associated with a higher density of clinicians. Regionally, Europe had the highest clinician density (5.70 clinicians per 100 000 population) whereas Africa (0.18 clinicians per 100 000 population) and Southeast Asia (1.12 clinicians per 100 000 population) had the lowest. The OHNS clinicians deliver most of the surgical management of ear diseases and hearing care, rhinologic and sinus diseases, laryngeal disorders, and upper aerodigestive mucosal cancer globally. Conclusion and Relevance: This cross-sectional survey study provides a comprehensive assessment of the global OHNS workforce. These results can guide focused investment in training and policy development to address disparities in the availability of OHNS clinicians.

Barriers to head and neck cancer care in high-income and low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Identify patient-perceived barriers to head and neck cancer care and compare differences in barriers by country income status. RECENT FINDINGS: Of the 37 articles, 51% ( n  = 19) were from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), while 49% ( n =  18) were from high-income countries. Of the papers from high-income countries, unspecified head and neck cancer (HNC) subtype (67%, n =  12) were the most common cancer type, while upper aerodigestive tract mucosal malignancies (58%, n =  11) were more common in LMICs ( P  = 0.02). Based on World Health Organization barriers, level of education ( P  =  < 0.01) and alternative medicine use ( P  = 0.04) were greater barriers in LMICs compared to high-income countries. At least 50% of articles listed barriers at all three 'Three Delays' timepoints. There were no significant differences by country income status for the 'Three Delays' timepoints of deciding to seek care ( P  = 0.23), reaching the healthcare facility ( P  = 0.75), or receiving care ( P  = 1.00). SUMMARY: Patients face barriers to care for head and neck cancer regardless of country income status. There is overlap in several barriers and a need for systemic improvement in access. The differences in education and alternative medicine may guide region-specific interventions to improve the provision of head and neck services.

Gender-Based Microaggressions in Surgery: A Scoping Review of the Global Literature.

BACKGROUND: In addition to systemic gender disparities, women in surgery encounter interpersonal microaggressions. The objective of this study is to describe the most common forms of microaggressions reported by women in surgery. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review using PubMed/MEDLINE, Ovid, and Web of Science to describe the international, indexed English-language literature on gender-based microaggressions experienced by female surgeons, surgical trainees, and medical students in surgery. After screening by title, abstract, and full-text, 37 articles were retained for data extraction and analysis. Microaggressions were analyzed using the Sexist Microaggression Experience and Stress Scale (MESS) framework and stratified by country of origin. RESULTS: Gender-based microaggression publications most commonly originated from the United States (n = 27 articles), Canada (n = 3), and India (n = 2). Gender-based microaggressions were classified into environmental invalidations (n = 20), being treated like a second-class citizen (n = 18), assumptions of traditional gender roles (n = 12), sexual objectification (n = 11), assumptions of inferiority (n = 10), being forced to leave gender at the door (n = 8), and experiencing sexist language (n = 6). Additionally, attendings were more frequently reported to experience microaggressions than surgical trainees and medical students, but more articles reported data on attendings (n = 16) than surgical trainees (n = 10) or students (n = 4). CONCLUSION: While recent advancements have opened the field of surgery to women, there is still a lack of female representation, and persistent microaggressions may perpetuate this gender disparity. Addressing microaggressions against female surgeons is essential to achieving gender equity in surgical practice.