ABSTRACT
Introduction Aural polyps are a misnomer. Any lesion can present as a mass in the external auditory canal. Aural polyps are proliferation of the granulation tissue due to long standing inflammatory process with associated otalgia and otorrhea. Objectives To document the clinicoradiological presentations, intraoperative findings, and histopathological diagnosis of aural polyp, correlating them. Methods In our study 81 patients underwent treatment for aural polyps in the department of Ear, Nose, and Throat (ENT) from April 1997 to April 2022. Results were tabulated, a simple descriptive analysis was done using the Statistical Package Social Sciences software, and the results obtained were represented as percentages and presented in tables. Results The majority (38) of the patients presenting with aural polyps were diagnosed with mucosal and squamous type of CSOM, and 22 with simple granulation polyps. There were also 5 patients with malignant otitis externa, 3 patients had glomus tumors, 2 patients with retained foreign bodies, and 3 patients with brain herniation. We also identified aberrant internal carotid artery, high jugular bulb, one patient had facial nerve neuroma, one patient had polyp from the tragus diagnosed with tuberculosis, one patient with keratosis obturans, and one with exostosis. Conclusion A thorough detailed examination and mastoid exploration with radiological and histopathological evaluation is mandatory for better defining the definitive treatment. Utmost care and meticulousness are advised for the surgeons while dealing with aural polyps to avoid any complications.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Hospice utilization metrics are essential for any serious effort to improve end-of-life care in oncology. However, oncologists do not routinely receive these personalized reports. We evaluated whether a behavioral science intervention, using peer comparisons coupled with social norms, was associated with improvements in hospice use. METHODS: Oncologists at two academic practices of Johns Hopkins Medicine were randomly assigned to receive a peer comparison report by e-mail displaying individual hospice utilization metrics compared with top-performing peers or to receive no report. The data accrued for the intervention represented hospice utilization for the previous calendar year. The intervention period was from June 1, 2020, to December 30, 2020, and included oncologists from both the solid and hematologic malignancies programs. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients between groups with short hospice length of stay (LOS; defined as ≤ 7 days) after 6 months. Secondary outcomes included hospice referral rate, enrollment rate, and median LOS. RESULTS: Forty-seven oncologists participated. The percent of patients with a short hospice stay in the intervention group was lower (17.4%) compared with patients treated by physicians in the usual care group (46.3%, difference = 21.8%; 95% CI, 16.0 to 41.6; P < .001). Receipt of peer comparisons was associated with a greater likelihood of enrolling in hospice (73.7% v 42.8%; difference = 31.1%; 95% CI, 20.4 to 41.7; P < .001) and a longer hospice LOS (37.2 v 18.3 days; difference = 17.2; 95% CI, 8.8 to 25.7 days; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Peer comparisons improved hospice utilization metrics among a group of academic oncologists. Behavioral science offers one pragmatic strategy to overcome suboptimal oncologist decision-making biases related to hospice use.