Determinants of physician assessment of chronic rhinosinusitis disease control using EPOS 2020 criteria and the importance of incorporating patient perspectives of disease control.

BACKGROUND: We identify chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) manifestations associated with how rhinologists assess CRS control, with a focus on patient perspectives (patient-reported CRS control). METHODS: Fifteen rhinologists were provided with real-world data from 200 CRS patients. Participating rhinologists first classified patients' CRS control as "controlled," "partly controlled," and "uncontrolled" using seven CRS manifestations reflecting European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS) CRS control criteria (nasal obstruction, drainage, impaired smell, facial pain/pressure, sleep disturbance, use of systemic antibiotics/corticosteroids in past 6 months, and nasal endoscopy findings) and patient-reported CRS control. They then classified patients' CRS control without knowledge of patient-reported CRS control. Interrater reliability and agreement of rhinologist-assessed CRS control with patient-reported CRS control and EPOS guidelines were determined. RESULTS: CRS control classification with and without knowledge of patient-reported CRS control was highly consistent across rhinologists (κw  = 0.758). Rhinologist-assessed CRS control agreed with patient-reported CRS control significantly better when rhinologists had knowledge of patient-reported CRS control (κw  = 0.736 vs. κw  = 0.554, p < 0.001). Patient-reported CRS control, nasal obstruction, drainage, and endoscopy findings were most strongly associated with rhinologists' assessment of CRS control. Rhinologists' CRS control assessments weakly agreed with EPOS CRS control guidelines with (κw  = 0.529) and without (κw  = 0.538) patient-reported CRS control. Rhinologists classified CRS as more controlled than EPOS guidelines in almost 50% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: This study directly demonstrates the importance of patient-reported CRS control as a dominant influence on rhinologists' CRS control assessment. Knowledge of patient-reported CRS control may better align rhinologists' CRS control assessments and treatment decisions with patients' perspectives.

International consensus statement on allergy and rhinology: Olfaction.

BACKGROUND: The literature regarding clinical olfaction, olfactory loss, and olfactory dysfunction has expanded rapidly over the past two decades, with an exponential rise in the past year. There is substantial variability in the quality of this literature and a need to consolidate and critically review the evidence. It is with that aim that we have gathered experts from around the world to produce this International Consensus on Allergy and Rhinology: Olfaction (ICAR:O). METHODS: Using previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to olfaction. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence-based review, or evidence-based review with recommendations format as dictated by available evidence and scope within the ICAR:O document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:O document was integrated and reviewed by all authors for final consensus. RESULTS: The ICAR:O document reviews nearly 100 separate topics within the realm of olfaction, including diagnosis, epidemiology, disease burden, diagnosis, testing, etiology, treatment, and associated pathologies. CONCLUSION: This critical review of the existing clinical olfaction literature provides much needed insight and clarity into the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of patients with olfactory dysfunction, while also clearly delineating gaps in our knowledge and evidence base that we should investigate further.

Characterizing Medicare Reimbursements and Clinical Activity Among Female Otolaryngologists.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate geographic and temporal trends in Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) billing and reimbursements across female otolaryngologists (ORL). METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional, retrospective analysis of the 2017 Medicare Physician and Other Suppliers Aggregate File. We analyzed differences in the number of services, patients, reimbursements, unique Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes used, and services billed per patient among female ORLs. RESULTS: Female ORLs accounted for 15.2% of the 8453 Medicare-reimbursed ORLs. Female ORLs who graduated between 2000 and 2010 were reimbursed a median of $58 031.9 (IQR: $32 286.5-$91 512.2) and performed a median of 702 (IQR: 359.5-1221.5) services, significantly less than those who graduated between 1990 and 1999 (median: $67 508.9; IQR: 37 018.0-110 471.5; P < .001; median: 1055.5; IQR: 497.3-1944; P < .001). Female ORLs who graduated between 2000 and 2010 saw a median of 232 patients (IQR: 130.5-368), significantly less than those who graduated between 1990 and 1999 (median: 308; IQR: 168.3-496; P < .001) patients, significantly more than those. Female ORLs in urban settings performed a median of 795 (IQR: 364-1494.3) services and billed for a median of 42 (IQR: 28-58) unique codes, significantly fewer than their counterparts in rural settings (median: 1096; IQR: 600-2192.5; P = .002; median: 54; IQR: 31.5-64.5; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Medicare reimbursements and billing patterns across female ORLs varied by graduation decade and geography. Female ORLs further along in their careers may be reimbursed more with greater clinical volume and productivity. Those practicing in urban settings may have practices with decreased procedural diversity and lower clinical volume compared to their counterparts in rural areas.

Assessment of Opioid Use and Analgesic Requirements After Endoscopic Sinus Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The opioid epidemic has generated interest in optimizing opioid prescribing after common surgeries. Recent studies have shown a broad range of analgesic prescription patterns following endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). Objective: To compare the efficacy of different analgesic regimens after ESS. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multi-institutional, nonblinded randomized clinical trial was conducted at 6 tertiary centers across the US and Canada and included participants who underwent ESS for acute or chronic rhinosinusitis. The study was conducted from March 2019 to March 2020, and the data were analyzed in November to December 2020. Interventions: All participants received acetaminophen, 650 mg, as the first-line analgesic. From there, patients were randomized to either oxycodone rescue (oxycodone, 5 mg, as second-line therapy) or ibuprofen rescue (ibuprofen, 600 mg, as second-line therapy, with oxycodone, 5 mg, reserved for breakthrough pain). Main Outcomes and Measures: Baseline characteristics and disease severity were collected at enrollment. Medication logs, pain scores, and epistaxis measures were collected until postoperative day 7. The primary outcome was the postoperative visual analog scale score for pain. Brief Pain Inventory Pain Severity and Pain Interference Scores were also collected. Results: A total of 118 patients were randomized (62 [52.5%] oxycodone rescue, 56 [47.5%] ibuprofen rescue; mean [SD] age, 46.7 [16.3] years; 44 women [44.0%]; 83 White [83.0%], 7 Black [7.0%], and 7 Asian individuals [7.0%]). After exclusions for loss to follow-up and noncompliance, 51 remained in the oxycodone rescue group and 49 in the ibuprofen rescue group. The groups had similar demographic characteristics and disease severity. Thirty-two (63%) in the oxycodone rescue group had adequate pain management with acetaminophen only, while 19 (37%) consumed at least 1 oxycodone dose. In the ibuprofen rescue group, 18 (16%) required only acetaminophen, 28 (57%) used only acetaminophen and ibuprofen, and the remaining 13 (26%) consumed 1 or more oxycodone doses. The groups had similar average acetaminophen (9.69 vs 7.96 doses; difference, 1.73; 95% CI, -1.37 to 4.83) and oxycodone (1.89 vs 0.77 doses; difference, 1.13; 95% CI, -0.11 to 2.36) use. Both groups had similar postoperative visual analog scale scores. A subanalysis that compared opioids users with nonusers showed clinically significant lower pain scores in nonusers at multiple postoperative points. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, most patients who underwent ESS could be treated postoperatively using a nonopioid regimen of either acetaminophen alone or acetaminophen and ibuprofen. Ibuprofen as a second-line therapy did not reduce overall narcotic consumption, but the overall narcotic use was low in both groups. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03783702.