Perioperative Analgesia for Patients Undergoing Septoplasty and Rhinoplasty: An Evidence-Based Review.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Opioid misuse and diversion is a pressing topic in today's healthcare environment. The objective of this study was to conduct a review of non-opioid perioperative analgesic regimens following septoplasty, rhinoplasty, and septorhinoplasty. STUDY DESIGN: Evidence-based systematic review. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were reviewed for articles related to perioperative analgesic use in septoplasty, rhinoplasty, and septorhinoplasty. Quality of studies were assessed via the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria, Jadad scores, and the Cochrane bias tool. Patient demographic data and clinical outcomes, including medication type, dose, administration time, pain scores, and adverse events, were obtained from included studies. Summary tables detailing the benefits and harms of each investigated regimen are included. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies met inclusion criteria for this evidence-based review. The quality of the studies was determined to be of moderate quality based off of GRADE standardized criteria with a mean Jadad score of 3.1. A preponderance of evidence showed reduced perioperative pain scores and rescue analgesic requirements, supporting the use of local anesthetics for analgesic control. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) demonstrated similar decreased visual analog scores and postoperative analgesic demand; however, increased adverse events in this class warrant caution. CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary literature supports the use of NSAIDs, gabapentin, local anesthetics, and α-agonists as effective perioperative analgesic opioid alternatives for septoplasty and septorhinoplasty. Local anesthetic use is a cost-effective option resulting in decreased postoperative pain scores and rescue analgesic requirements. Further large-scale, multi-institutional, controlled studies are needed to provide definitive recommendations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA Laryngoscope, 129:E200-E212, 2019.

Opioid prescribing patterns among otolaryngologists: Crucial insights among the medicare population.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: There has been growing recognition of the roles prescription drug misuse and diversion play in facilitating the ongoing opioid epidemic. Our objective was to evaluate opioid prescription patterns among practicing otolaryngologists. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of a CMS database. METHODS: Medicare Part D beneficiary data (2015) were accessed for a list of otolaryngologists. Opioid prescription rates, amount, and supply were calculated. Factors including board certification, experience, gender, and location were obtained for the 9,068 unique otolaryngologists represented in this dataset. RESULTS: In 2015, otolaryngologists wrote 133,779 opioid prescriptions for 922,806 days (6.9 days/per prescription). The majority was for hydrocodone-acetaminophen (64.0%). Most otolaryngologists (51.2%) prescribed ≤ 10 opioids; 6.1% offered > 50 opioid prescriptions. Men wrote more prescriptions on average. Opioid prescription rates were greatest in the Midwest (4.6%) and least in the Northeast (1.8%), and the highest/lowest rates were in Delaware (8.6%) and New York (1.3%). Midcareer (11 -20 years) otolaryngologists were most likely to write >50 prescriptions. The opioid prescription rate declined with greater experience. CONCLUSIONS: Opioid prescriptions written by otolaryngologists may play a significant role in the availability of these agents, as otolaryngologists wrote nearly 1 million days worth of opioids to Medicare beneficiaries in 2015. Although the majority of otolaryngologists write fewer than 11 prescriptions annually, those writing more prescriptions also write lengthier courses. There is significant geographic variation in prescribing patterns, highlighting a lack of consensus, and midcareer otolaryngologists are more aggressive in offering opioids. These findings highlight an urgent need for strengthening educational resources aimed at minimizing unnecessary prescriptions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: NA. Laryngoscope, 128:1576-1581, 2018.

Incorporation of antibiotics and systemic steroids by sinus surgeons: is there widespread consensus?

BACKGROUND: The objective of this work was to evaluate factors associated with antibiotic and oral corticosteroid (OCS) prescription among otolaryngologists regularly performing sinus surgery. METHODS: Fellowship-trained rhinologists, including fellowship directors, were identified via the American Rhinologic Society (ARS) website. Non-fellowship-trained otolaryngologists performing ≥25 balloons (frontal/maxillary) or ≥25 functional endoscopic sinus surgeries (FESSs) (frontal/maxillary/ethmoids) were also included in "balloon surgeons" and "sinus surgeon" cohorts, respectively. Prescribing data for Medicare Part D beneficiaries was obtained for 2015. RESULTS: Otolaryngologists included in this analysis wrote a median of 54 scripts for antibiotics, with a 15.1% antibiotic prescription rate. The overall script length per antibiotic was 11.1 days. Of fellowship-trained rhinologists, 90.2% wrote fewer than 100 scripts, compared to 25.6% and 32.5% of sinus surgeons and balloon surgeons, respectively. Fellowship-trained rhinologists wrote lengthier antibiotic scripts (14.1 vs 10.3 days, p < 0.05). Clinicians who have been in practice longer prescribed antibiotics significantly more frequently. Fellowship-trained rhinologists had a greater OCS rate (8.9%) than balloon and sinus surgeons (7.1%), also writing lengthier courses (15.0 vs 8.1 days). Early-career otolaryngologists wrote lengthier steroid prescriptions than those with 11 to 20 years and >20 years in practice. CONCLUSION: Antibiotic and OCS utilization varies by type of training, as non-fellowship-trained sinus surgeons and balloon surgeons tend to utilize antibiotics more aggressively, and fellowship-trained rhinologists utilize OCS more frequently. Otolaryngologists with more years in practice are more likely to incorporate antibiotics in the management of sinus disorders, although these conclusions must be considered in the context of this resource's limitations. Further clarification of guidelines may be helpful for minimizing divergent practices and maintaining a consensus.

How did that get there? A population-based analysis of nasal foreign bodies.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to calculate nationwide incidence of emergency department (ED) visits for nasal foreign bodies, identify the most frequently encountered consumer products, and evaluate outcomes and demographic trends. METHODS: The Nationwide Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) was evaluated for ED visits related to nasal foreign bodies for the most recent 5-year span available. Nationwide incidence was calculated, and the most frequent foreign bodies were identified and organized by demographics including age and gender. RESULTS: A total of 6418 entries extrapolated to an estimated 198,566 ED visits nationwide were found. Out of individual case entries evaluated, median patient age was 3 years, and 42.7% of patients were male. Ninety-six percent (96.4%) of patients were released after examination/treatment. Jewelry beads comprised a plurality of nasal foreign bodies, followed by paper products and toys. Patients with nasal foreign bodies involving toys, building sets, pens/pencils, batteries, coins, and nails/screws were predominantly male, whereas patients with nasal foreign bodies involving jewelry, paper products, and buttons were predominantly female. Jewelry was the most common item for patients in most age groups; age-specific differences in the composition of remaining nasal foreign bodies were noted. CONCLUSION: A variety of consumer products carry inherent risks for becoming nasal foreign bodies, with nearly 200,000 ED visits over a 5-year period. Jewelry beads, paper products, and toys were the most common products noted. Speedy recognition and retrieval of these items and other objects noted is imperative for avoidance of deleterious sequelae. Demographic-specific trends noted and organized by age and gender may be an invaluable adjunct for patient history-taking and clinical examination.