Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 8 de 8
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg ; 168(2): 115-130, 2023 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36757810

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To develop an expert consensus statement regarding persistent pediatric obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) focused on quality improvement and clarification of controversies. Persistent OSA was defined as OSA after adenotonsillectomy or OSA after tonsillectomy when adenoids are not enlarged. METHODS: An expert panel of clinicians, nominated by stakeholder organizations, used the published consensus statement methodology from the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery to develop statements for a target population of children aged 2-18 years. A medical librarian systematically searched the literature used as a basis for the clinical statements. A modified Delphi method was used to distill expert opinion and compose statements that met a standardized definition of consensus. Duplicate statements were combined prior to the final Delphi survey. RESULTS: After 3 iterative Delphi surveys, 34 statements met the criteria for consensus, while 18 statements did not. The clinical statements were grouped into 7 categories: general, patient assessment, management of patients with obesity, medical management, drug-induced sleep endoscopy, surgical management, and postoperative care. CONCLUSION: The panel reached a consensus for 34 statements related to the assessment, management and postoperative care of children with persistent OSA. These statements can be used to establish care algorithms, improve clinical care, and identify areas that would benefit from future research.


Assuntos
Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono , Tonsilectomia , Criança , Humanos , Adenoidectomia/métodos , Endoscopia/métodos , Cuidados Pós-Operatórios , Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono/diagnóstico , Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono/cirurgia , Tonsilectomia/efeitos adversos , Tonsilectomia/métodos
2.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg ; 165(4): 578-591, 2021 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33400611

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To develop an expert consensus statement on pediatric drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) that clarifies controversies and offers opportunities for quality improvement. Pediatric DISE was defined as flexible endoscopy to examine the upper airway of a child with obstructive sleep apnea who is sedated and asleep. METHODS: Development group members with expertise in pediatric DISE followed established guidelines for developing consensus statements. A search strategist systematically reviewed the literature, and the best available evidence was used to compose consensus statements regarding DISE in children 0 to 18 years old. Topics with significant practice variation and those that would improve the quality of patient care were prioritized. RESULTS: The development group identified 59 candidate consensus statements, based on 50 initial proposed topics, that focused on addressing the following high-yield topics: (1) indications and utility, (2) protocol, (3) optimal sedation, (4) grading and interpretation, (5) complications and safety, and (6) outcomes for DISE-directed surgery. After 2 iterations of the Delphi survey and removal of duplicative statements, 26 statements met the criteria for consensus; 11 statements were designated as no consensus. Several areas, such as the role of DISE at the time of adenotonsillectomy, were identified as needing further research. CONCLUSION: Expert consensus was achieved for 26 statements pertaining to indications, protocol, and outcomes for pediatric DISE. Clinicians can use these statements to improve quality of care, inform policy and protocols, and identify areas of uncertainty. Future research, ideally randomized controlled trials, is warranted to address additional controversies related to pediatric DISE.


Assuntos
Sedação Consciente , Endoscopia/métodos , Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono/cirurgia , Sono , Adolescente , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Consenso , Técnica Delphi , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Recém-Nascido , Masculino , Melhoria de Qualidade
3.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg ; 162(1_suppl): S1-S38, 2020 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31910111

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Nosebleed, also known as epistaxis, is a common problem that occurs at some point in at least 60% of people in the United States. While the majority of nosebleeds are limited in severity and duration, about 6% of people who experience nosebleeds will seek medical attention. For the purposes of this guideline, we define the target patient with a nosebleed as a patient with bleeding from the nostril, nasal cavity, or nasopharynx that is sufficient to warrant medical advice or care. This includes bleeding that is severe, persistent, and/or recurrent, as well as bleeding that impacts a patient's quality of life. Interventions for nosebleeds range from self-treatment and home remedies to more intensive procedural interventions in medical offices, emergency departments, hospitals, and operating rooms. Epistaxis has been estimated to account for 0.5% of all emergency department visits and up to one-third of all otolaryngology-related emergency department encounters. Inpatient hospitalization for aggressive treatment of severe nosebleeds has been reported in 0.2% of patients with nosebleeds. PURPOSE: The primary purpose of this multidisciplinary guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities in the management of nosebleeds and to create clear and actionable recommendations to implement these opportunities in clinical practice. Specific goals of this guideline are to promote best practices, reduce unjustified variations in care of patients with nosebleeds, improve health outcomes, and minimize the potential harms of nosebleeds or interventions to treat nosebleeds. The target patient for the guideline is any individual aged ≥3 years with a nosebleed or history of nosebleed who needs medical treatment or seeks medical advice. The target audience of this guideline is clinicians who evaluate and treat patients with nosebleed. This includes primary care providers such as family medicine physicians, internists, pediatricians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners. It also includes specialists such as emergency medicine providers, otolaryngologists, interventional radiologists/neuroradiologists and neurointerventionalists, hematologists, and cardiologists. The setting for this guideline includes any site of evaluation and treatment for a patient with nosebleed, including ambulatory medical sites, the emergency department, the inpatient hospital, and even remote outpatient encounters with phone calls and telemedicine. Outcomes to be considered for patients with nosebleed include control of acute bleeding, prevention of recurrent episodes of nasal bleeding, complications of treatment modalities, and accuracy of diagnostic measures. This guideline addresses the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of nosebleed. It focuses on nosebleeds that commonly present to clinicians via phone calls, office visits, and emergency room encounters. This guideline discusses first-line treatments such as nasal compression, application of vasoconstrictors, nasal packing, and nasal cautery. It also addresses more complex epistaxis management, which includes the use of endoscopic arterial ligation and interventional radiology procedures. Management options for 2 special groups of patients-patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome and patients taking medications that inhibit coagulation and/or platelet function-are included in this guideline. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group. It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide for managing patients with nosebleed. In this context, the purpose is to define useful actions for clinicians, generalists, and specialists from a variety of disciplines to improve quality of care. Conversely, the statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients. ACTION STATEMENTS: The guideline development group made recommendations for the following key action statements: (1) At the time of initial contact, the clinician should distinguish the nosebleed patient who requires prompt management from the patient who does not. (2) The clinician should treat active bleeding for patients in need of prompt management with firm sustained compression to the lower third of the nose, with or without the assistance of the patient or caregiver, for 5 minutes or longer. (3a) For patients in whom bleeding precludes identification of a bleeding site despite nasal compression, the clinician should treat ongoing active bleeding with nasal packing. (3b) The clinician should use resorbable packing for patients with a suspected bleeding disorder or for patients who are using anticoagulation or antiplatelet medications. (4) The clinician should educate the patient who undergoes nasal packing about the type of packing placed, timing of and plan for removal of packing (if not resorbable), postprocedure care, and any signs or symptoms that would warrant prompt reassessment. (5) The clinician should document factors that increase the frequency or severity of bleeding for any patient with a nosebleed, including personal or family history of bleeding disorders, use of anticoagulant or antiplatelet medications, or intranasal drug use. (6) The clinician should perform anterior rhinoscopy to identify a source of bleeding after removal of any blood clot (if present) for patients with nosebleeds. (7a) The clinician should perform, or should refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to identify the site of bleeding and guide further management in patients with recurrent nasal bleeding, despite prior treatment with packing or cautery, or with recurrent unilateral nasal bleeding. (8) The clinician should treat patients with an identified site of bleeding with an appropriate intervention, which may include one or more of the following: topical vasoconstrictors, nasal cautery, and moisturizing or lubricating agents. (9) When nasal cautery is chosen for treatment, the clinician should anesthetize the bleeding site and restrict application of cautery only to the active or suspected site(s) of bleeding. (10) The clinician should evaluate, or refer to a clinician who can evaluate, candidacy for surgical arterial ligation or endovascular embolization for patients with persistent or recurrent bleeding not controlled by packing or nasal cauterization. (11) In the absence of life-threatening bleeding, the clinician should initiate first-line treatments prior to transfusion, reversal of anticoagulation, or withdrawal of anticoagulation/antiplatelet medications for patients using these medications. (12) The clinician should assess, or refer to a specialist who can assess, the presence of nasal telangiectasias and/or oral mucosal telangiectasias in patients who have a history of recurrent bilateral nosebleeds or a family history of recurrent nosebleeds to diagnose hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome. (13) The clinician should educate patients with nosebleeds and their caregivers about preventive measures for nosebleeds, home treatment for nosebleeds, and indications to seek additional medical care. (14) The clinician or designee should document the outcome of intervention within 30 days or document transition of care in patients who had a nosebleed treated with nonresorbable packing, surgery, or arterial ligation/embolization. The policy level for the following recommendation, about examination of the nasal cavity and nasopharynx using nasal endoscopy, was an option: (7b) The clinician may perform, or may refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to examine the nasal cavity and nasopharynx in patients with epistaxis that is difficult to control or when there is concern for unrecognized pathology contributing to epistaxis.


Assuntos
Cauterização , Endoscopia/métodos , Epistaxe/terapia , Ligadura , Melhoria de Qualidade , Vasoconstritores/uso terapêutico , Epistaxe/diagnóstico , Epistaxe/prevenção & controle , Hemostáticos/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Nasais/métodos , Gravidade do Paciente , Educação de Pacientes como Assunto/métodos , Fatores de Risco , Tampões Cirúrgicos , Telangiectasia Hemorrágica Hereditária/diagnóstico
4.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg ; 162(1): 8-25, 2020 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31910122

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Nosebleed, also known as epistaxis, is a common problem that occurs at some point in at least 60% of people in the United States. While the great majority of nosebleeds are limited in severity and duration, about 6% of people who experience nosebleeds will seek medical attention. For the purposes of this guideline, we define the target patient with a nosebleed as a patient with bleeding from the nostril, nasal cavity, or nasopharynx that is sufficient to warrant medical advice or care. This includes bleeding that is severe, persistent, and/or recurrent, as well as bleeding that impacts a patient's quality of life. Interventions for nosebleeds range from self-treatment and home remedies to more intensive procedural interventions in medical offices, emergency departments, hospitals, and operating rooms. Epistaxis has been estimated to account for 0.5% of all emergency department visits and up to one-third of all otolaryngology-related emergency department encounters. Inpatient hospitalization for aggressive treatment of severe nosebleeds has been reported in 0.2% of patients with nosebleeds. PURPOSE: The primary purpose of this multidisciplinary guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities in the management of nosebleeds and to create clear and actionable recommendations to implement these opportunities in clinical practice. Specific goals of this guideline are to promote best practices, reduce unjustified variations in care of patients with nosebleeds, improve health outcomes, and minimize the potential harms of nosebleeds or interventions to treat nosebleeds. The target patient for the guideline is any individual aged ≥3 years with a nosebleed or history of nosebleed who needs medical treatment or seeks medical advice. The target audience of this guideline is clinicians who evaluate and treat patients with nosebleed. This includes primary care providers such as family medicine physicians, internists, pediatricians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners. It also includes specialists such as emergency medicine providers, otolaryngologists, interventional radiologists/neuroradiologists and neurointerventionalists, hematologists, and cardiologists. The setting for this guideline includes any site of evaluation and treatment for a patient with nosebleed, including ambulatory medical sites, the emergency department, the inpatient hospital, and even remote outpatient encounters with phone calls and telemedicine. Outcomes to be considered for patients with nosebleed include control of acute bleeding, prevention of recurrent episodes of nasal bleeding, complications of treatment modalities, and accuracy of diagnostic measures. This guideline addresses the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of nosebleed. It will focus on nosebleeds that commonly present to clinicians with phone calls, office visits, and emergency room encounters. This guideline discusses first-line treatments such as nasal compression, application of vasoconstrictors, nasal packing, and nasal cautery. It also addresses more complex epistaxis management, which includes the use of endoscopic arterial ligation and interventional radiology procedures. Management options for 2 special groups of patients, patients with hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome (HHT) and patients taking medications that inhibit coagulation and/or platelet function, are included in this guideline. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the working group. It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide for managing patients with nosebleed. In this context, the purpose is to define useful actions for clinicians, generalists, and specialists from a variety of disciplines to improve quality of care. Conversely, the statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based upon their experience and assessment of individual patients. ACTION STATEMENTS: The guideline development group made recommendations for the following key action statements: (1) At the time of initial contact, the clinician should distinguish the nosebleed patient who requires prompt management from the patient who does not. (2) The clinician should treat active bleeding for patients in need of prompt management with firm sustained compression to the lower third of the nose, with or without the assistance of the patient or caregiver, for 5 minutes or longer. (3a) For patients in whom bleeding precludes identification of a bleeding site despite nasal compression, the clinician should treat ongoing active bleeding with nasal packing. (3b) The clinician should use resorbable packing for patients with a suspected bleeding disorder or for patients who are using anticoagulation or antiplatelet medications. (4) The clinician should educate the patient who undergoes nasal packing about the type of packing placed, timing of and plan for removal of packing (if not resorbable), postprocedure care, and any signs or symptoms that would warrant prompt reassessment. (5) The clinician should document factors that increase the frequency or severity of bleeding for any patient with a nosebleed, including personal or family history of bleeding disorders, use of anticoagulant or antiplatelet medications, or intranasal drug use. (6) The clinician should perform anterior rhinoscopy to identify a source of bleeding after removal of any blood clot (if present) for patients with nosebleeds. (7a) The clinician should perform, or should refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to identify the site of bleeding and guide further management in patients with recurrent nasal bleeding, despite prior treatment with packing or cautery, or with recurrent unilateral nasal bleeding. (8) The clinician should treat patients with an identified site of bleeding with an appropriate intervention, which may include 1 or more of the following: topical vasoconstrictors, nasal cautery, and moisturizing or lubricating agents. (9) When nasal cautery is chosen for treatment, the clinician should anesthetize the bleeding site and restrict application of cautery only to the active or suspected site(s) of bleeding. (10) The clinician should evaluate, or refer to a clinician who can evaluate, candidacy for surgical arterial ligation or endovascular embolization for patients with persistent or recurrent bleeding not controlled by packing or nasal cauterization. (11) In the absence of life-threatening bleeding, the clinician should initiate first-line treatments prior to transfusion, reversal of anticoagulation, or withdrawal of anticoagulation/antiplatelet medications for patients using these medications. (12) The clinician should assess, or refer to a specialist who can assess, the presence of nasal telangiectasias and/or oral mucosal telangiectasias in patients who have a history of recurrent bilateral nosebleeds or a family history of recurrent nosebleeds to diagnose hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome (HHT). (13) The clinician should educate patients with nosebleeds and their caregivers about preventive measures for nosebleeds, home treatment for nosebleeds, and indications to seek additional medical care. (14) The clinician or designee should document the outcome of intervention within 30 days or document transition of care in patients who had a nosebleed treated with nonresorbable packing, surgery, or arterial ligation/embolization. The policy level for the following recommendation about examination of the nasal cavity and nasopharynx using nasal endoscopy was an option: (7b) The clinician may perform, or may refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to examine the nasal cavity and nasopharynx in patients with epistaxis that is difficult to control or when there is concern for unrecognized pathology contributing to epistaxis.


Assuntos
Epistaxe/epidemiologia , Epistaxe/terapia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Nasais/métodos , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Melhoria de Qualidade , Tratamento Conservador/métodos , Epistaxe/diagnóstico , Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Fidelidade a Diretrizes , Humanos , Incidência , Ligadura/métodos , Qualidade de Vida , Recidiva , Medição de Risco , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Resultado do Tratamento
6.
J Drugs Dermatol ; 15(10): 1270-1272, 2016 Oct 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27741347

RESUMO

An adolescent male presented to the office with a 3-month history of a small left ear mass located on the posterior helix. Although the patient was asymptomatic, the decision was made to remove the mass in the operating room and send for pathology. Following excision, the mass was stained and examined by the pathologist. Staining positive for Factor VIIIa and CD68, the lesion was also found to have a combination of histiocytes and fibroblastic spindle cells. The diagnosis of dermatofibroma, cellular type, was made and the patient required no further treatment. Seen in follow up several months after, there was complete resolution of the mass.

J Drugs Dermatol. 2016;15(10):1270-1272.


Assuntos
Pavilhão Auricular/patologia , Pavilhão Auricular/cirurgia , Histiocitoma Fibroso Benigno/diagnóstico , Histiocitoma Fibroso Benigno/cirurgia , Neoplasias Cutâneas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Cutâneas/cirurgia , Adolescente , Humanos , Masculino
7.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18197019

RESUMO

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Pressure is mounting on physicians to adopt electronic medical records. The field of health information technology is evolving rapidly with innovations and policies often outpacing science. We sought to review research and discussions about electronic medical records from the past year to keep abreast of these changes. RECENT FINDINGS: Original scientific research, especially from otolaryngologists, is lacking in this field. Adoption rates are slowly increasing, but more of the burden is shouldered by physicians despite policy efforts and the clear benefits to third-party payers. Scientific research from the past year suggests lack of improvements and even decreasing quality of healthcare with electronic medical record adoption in the ambulatory care setting. The increasing prevalence and standardization of electronic medical record systems results in a new set of problems including rising costs, audits, difficulties in transition and public concerns about security of information. SUMMARY: As major players in healthcare continue to push for adoption, increased effort must be made to demonstrate actual improvements in patient care in the ambulatory care setting. More scientific studies are needed to demonstrate what features of electronic medical records actually improve patient care. Otolaryngologists should help each other by disseminating research about improvement in patient outcomes with their systems since current adoption and outcomes policies do not apply to specialists.


Assuntos
Sistemas de Informação em Atendimento Ambulatorial , Sistemas Computadorizados de Registros Médicos , Otolaringologia , Humanos
8.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg ; 131(7): 605-9, 2005 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16027283

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To determine if age alone is a prognostic indicator of surgical outcomes for major head and neck procedures. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study over a 4-year period. SETTING: Academic referral center, institutional practice, hospitalized care. PATIENTS: Included in this study were patients who had undergone ablative, reconstructive, and other major surgical procedures of the head and neck, including neck dissection, laryngectomy, maxillectomy, thyroidectomy with lymphadenectomy, and composite resection of the oral cavity with reconstruction, for both malignant and benign disease. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient data and intraoperative and postoperative course factors were recorded. Comorbidity was graded using an Adult Comorbidity Evaluation 27 test, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and American Society of Anesthesiology score. Postoperative complications were dichotomized, and multiple logistic regression was used for data analysis. RESULTS: Medical chart review identified 157 cases. Analysis of data revealed that time under general anesthesia was the only factor consistently related to complications (P<.006), and it was the only factor consistently related to length of stay (P<.001). Analysis of major complications (6% incidence) as an outcome using univariate analysis resulted in a strong positive correlation with both comorbidity indexes: Adult Comorbidity Evaluation 27 (P = .002) and Charlson Comorbidity Index (P = .005). Multiple logistic regression showed no significant relationship between age 70 years or older (20% of patients) and either complications or hospital length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Patient's age alone is not a prognostic indicator of surgical outcome for major head and neck procedures. However, comorbidity is an important predictive factor for postoperative complications in any age group. Time under general anesthesia showed a statistically significant relationship with complication rate and hospital length of stay in multivariate analyses. Consequently, prevention of complications should focus on optimizing preoperative comorbid conditions.


Assuntos
Cabeça/cirurgia , Pescoço/cirurgia , Adolescente , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anestesia Geral , Criança , Feminino , Humanos , Laringectomia , Tempo de Internação , Masculino , Maxila/cirurgia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Prognóstico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Tireoidectomia , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...