American Rhinologic Society Expert Practice Statement: Indications and Recommendations for Septoplasty in Children.

The goal of this American Rhinologic Society Expert Practice Statement (EPS) is to provide recommendations and guidance through evidence-based consensus statements regarding pediatric septoplasty. This EPS was developed following the previously published methodology and approval process. The topics of interest included appropriate indications, safety and efficacy, timing, relevant quality of life instruments, and surgical techniques. Following a modified Delphi approach, six statements were developed, five of which reached consensus and one that did not. These statements and accompanying evidence are summarized along with an assessment of future needs.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Headache: 2022 Update.

Headache is an ancient problem plaguing a large proportion of the population. At present, headache disorders rank third among the global causes of disability, accounting for over $78 billion per year in direct and indirect costs in the United States. Given the prevalence of headache and the wide range of possible etiologies, the goal of this document is to help clarify the most appropriate initial imaging guidelines for headache for eight clinical scenarios/variants, which range from acute onset, life-threatening etiologies to chronic benign scenarios. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

Comprehensive Management of Headache for the Otolaryngologist: A Summary.

Otolaryngologists will frequently encounter patients with head and facial pain. The headache may be a primary disorder or a symptom of a secondary pathology. Understanding diagnostic criteria and the autonomic and otologic manifestations of primary headaches is imperative for accurate diagnosis and treatment. This article summarizes key points in the issue "Comprehensive Management of Headache for the Otolaryngologist" and can be used as a cursory reference.

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.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on otolaryngologic emergency department visits at two major NYC hospital systems.

PURPOSE: Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, emergency departments (ED) across the country have seen a significant decrease in patient visits. We aim to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on ED visits for acute otolaryngologic complaints in New York City, one of the first epicenters of the pandemic in the US. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of patients who presented to the ED with a primary diagnosis of an acute otolaryngologic complaint between March 1 and May 31 in 2019 and 2020. This was a multicenter study, including two tertiary care hospital systems encompassing Manhattan, Bronx, Queens, and Long Island. RESULTS: A total of 10,162 patients were identified. Significantly fewer patients presented to the ED for acute otolaryngologic complaints in 2020 (7332 vs 2830, p < 0.001). The rate of total otolaryngology-related ED visits was decreased by a factor of 0.635 (95% CI 0.6079 to 0.6634). In a subgroup analysis of each individual diagnosis, there was a significant decrease in rate of ED visits for 13 out of 18 diagnoses, including for life-threatening conditions, such as anaphylaxis. There was no significant difference based on which borough in New York City. Pediatric patients (age 0-17) were more significantly impacted by the pandemic compared to other age groups. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a reduction in the utilization of ED for acute otolaryngologic complaints, including those requiring emergent management, and an even more significant reduction in the pediatric population. Healthcare providers should encourage patients to seek appropriate care, particularly for those illnesses with significant associated morbidity and mortality.

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.

Incorporation of telemedicine by rhinologists: The COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

OBJECTIVES: The current analysis queries rhinologists' attitudes about the use of telemedicine, including the degree to which it has impacted practice patterns during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our objective was to survey rhinologists and understand the extent to which telemedicine serves as a rejoinder to in-person consultation: appreciation of relevant factors may be important in planning for present and future considerations. METHODS: A 14-question anonymous survey sent out to the American Rhinologic Society (ARS) membership in April 2020. It included demographic factors and detailed questions examining the extent of telemedicine use. Numerous topics including the degree of use, satisfaction with services, and utility of services were evaluated. RESULTS: There were 134 respondents. Most reported seeing ≤30% of typical in-person volume, with 14.8% not seeing any patients at all. 88.1% used telemedicine; 82.0% reported some level of satisfaction with telemedicine. The vast majority utilized platforms employing audio and video (83.3%), and a plurality reported spending 5-15 min on calls. Numerous reasons were cited for the use of telemedicine, including significant public health benefits amid the crisis (89.7%). Only 12.0% of respondents reported using telemedicine for hospital consultation. CONCLUSION: Rhinologists have embraced telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic in an attempt to improve accessibility, patient satisfaction, and revenue stream. When utilized appropriately, this technology obviates the need for seeing at-risk patients and performing procedures such as nasal endoscopy. Only a minority of rhinologists was dissatisfied, viewing this as a temporary fix during the pandemic.

The novel corona virus and rhinology: Impact on practice patterns and future directions.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of the novel coronavirus pandemic on practice patterns, clinical behavior, personal health, and emotional/psychological concerns of rhinologists. METHODS: A 15-question survey was sent out to the American Rhinologic Society's (ARS) membership to determine the impact of COVID-19 during the crisis. Demographic factors and practice patterns were collected and evaluated. RESULTS: There were 224 total respondents out of 835 ARS members queried (26.8% response rate). Study queries were sent in April 2020. Notably, 17.8% reported illness in themselves or their staff and 74.4% noted a psychological/emotional impact. A plurality of rhinologists noted their practice volume and in-office procedure volume has become 20.0% and 0.0% of their prior volumes, respectively. In addition, 96.2% were noted to be using telemedicine in our subspecialty. CONCLUSION: In addition to severely impacting volume and the perception of future decreases in patients and revenue, the COVID-19 pandemic has had a physical and emotional impact on rhinologists in ways that need to be further studied. These data include significantly novel and objective information. The COVID-19 crisis also reveals the important role of telemedicine in rhinology. Guidelines regarding personal protective equipment for in-office visits, nasal endoscopy, and other in-office and operating room procedures would be particularly helpful as future waves are expected.

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.

COVID-19 and rhinology: A look at the future.

The novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) has created a deadly pandemic that is now significantly impacting the United States. Otolaryngologists are considered high risk for contracting disease, as the virus resides in the nasal cavity, nasopharynx, and oropharynx. While valuable work has been publicized regarding several topics in Rhinology, we discuss other aspects of our specialty in further detail. There are several issues regarding Rhinologic practice that need to be clarified both for the current epidemic as well as for future expected "waves." In addition, as the pandemic dies down, guidelines are needed to optimize safe practices as we start seeing more patients again. These include protocols pertinent to safety, in-office Rhinologic procedures, the substitution of imaging for endoscopy, and understanding the appropriate role of telemedicine. We discuss these aspects of Rhinology as well as practical concerns relating to telemedicine and billing, as these issues take on increasing importance for Rhinologists both in the present and the future.

Embracing telemedicine into your otolaryngology practice amid the COVID-19 crisis: An invited commentary.

The COVID-19 pandemic has quickly and radically altered how Otolaryngologists provide patient care in the outpatient setting. Continuity of care with established patients as well as establishment of a professional relationship with new patients is challenging during this Public Health Emergency (PHE). Many geographic areas are under "stay at home" or "shelter in place" directives from state and local governments to avoid COVID-19 exposure risks. Medicare has recently allowed "broad flexibilities to furnish services using remote communications technology to avoid exposure risks to health care providers, patients, and the community." [1] The implementation of telemedicine, or virtual, services, will help the Otolaryngologists provide needed care to patients while mitigating the clinical and financial impact of the pandemic. The significant coding and billing issues related to implementing telemedicine services are discussed to promote acceptance of this technology by the practicing Otolaryngologist. Of particular importance, outpatient visit Current Procedural Terminology® codes (99201-99215) may be used for telehealth visits performed in real-time audio and video.

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.