Voice Rehabilitation by Voice Prostheses After Total Laryngectomy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis for 11,918 Patients.

Purpose Our aim was to assess the different voice prostheses (VPs) to identify the most efficient, safest, patient-tailored, longest lifetime, and inexpensive VPs and assess the different factors affecting their quality. Method In September 2017, 15 databases were searched to include all randomized controlled trials. A new search was done in May 2019 to include all other study design articles, which include all the new-era VPs subtypes. Network meta-analysis (NMA) was applied to all 27 outcomes, besides NMA overall and partial order setting was done by using Hasse scatter plots. p values were used in NMA, where the best VPs are approaching one and the least approaches zero. Meta-analysis was done for the rest of the outcomes. Results Two hundred one articles were eligible for inclusion in our study (N = 11,918). Provox-2 was significantly the most efficient and safest device concerning the most patient preference (odds ratio [OR] = 33.88 [0.65, 1762.24]; p = .92), the least dislodgement (risk ratio [RR] = 0.27 [0.13, 0.57]; p = .79), the least airflow resistance (RR = 0.42 [0.08, 2.11]; p = .84), the least granulation formation (RR = 0.73 [0.02, 26.32]; p = .60), and the least VPs' inaccurate size (RR = 0.77 (0.23, 2.61); p = .66). Heat and moisture exchanger addition showed a significant increase in maximum phonation time and breathing experience, with p values (1 and .59), respectively. While heat and moisture exchanger addition showed a significant decline in stoma cleaning frequency, coughing frequency, forced expectoration, sputum production, sleeping problems, and loosening of adhesive, with p values (.99, .72, .69, .96, 1, and 0.96), respectively, Groningen low resistance and Nijdam were considered the worst devices with both overall mean p value of .44. Conclusions Provox-2 is considered the best choice as being the most preferable for patients, with the least airflow resistance, dislodgment, granulation formation, and prosthesis inaccurate size. Groningen low resistance and Nijdam were considered the worst devices according to our analysis. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.14802903.

Study Protocol for a Global Survey: Awareness and Preparedness of Hospital Staff Against Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Outbreak.

Background: The outbreak of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by a novel coronavirus (named SARS-CoV-2) has gained attention globally and has been recognized as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) by the World Health Organization (WHO) due to the rapidly increasing number of deaths and confirmed cases. Health care workers (HCWs) are vulnerable to this crisis as they are the first frontline to receive and manage COVID-19 patients. In this multicenter multinational survey, we aim to assess the level of awareness and preparedness of hospital staff regarding COVID-19 all over the world. Methods: From February to March 2020, the web-based or paper-based survey to gather information about the hospital staff's awareness and preparedness in the participants' countries will be carried out using a structured questionnaire based on the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) checklist and delivered to participants by the local collaborators for each hospital. As of March 2020, we recruited 374 hospitals from 58 countries that could adhere to this protocol as approved by their Institutional Review Boards (IRB) or Ethics Committees (EC). Discussion: The awareness and preparedness of HCWs against COVID-19 are of utmost importance not only to protect themselves from infection, but also to control the virus transmission in healthcare facilities and to manage the disease, especially in the context of manpower lacking and hospital overload during the pandemic. The results of this survey can be used to inform hospitals about the awareness and preparedness of their health staff regarding COVID-19, so appropriate policies and practice guidelines can be implemented to improve their capabilities of facing this crisis and other future pandemic-prone diseases.

Concordance of bone and non-bone specimens in microbiological diagnosis of osteomyelitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of osteomyelitis is invasive and expensive as the current standard technique is the bone biopsy. Our aim was to compare the degree of agreement and concordance between standard bone biopsy and other non-bone techniques. METHODS: We performed an electronic search through 12 electronic databases to retrieve relevant studeis. Our criteria included any original article that reported the degree of agreement and/or the concordance between bone biopsy and other non-bone techniques in diagnosing osteomyelitis. We published our protocol in PROSPERO with a registration number, CRD42017080336. RESULTS: There were 29 studies included in the qualitative analysis, of which 15 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Samples from sinus tract had the highest concordance with bone biopsy samples, while swab samples were the least concordant with bone biopsy samples. Additionally, Staphylococcus aureus was the most common bacteria isolated and the most concordant from samples, compared to other types of causative agents. Sinus tract had a significantly very high degree of agreement with bone samples. S. aureus had the highest degree of agreement in bone smaples. CONCLUSION: Diagnosis of osteomyelitis using sinus tract swab is close in results' accuracy to bone biopsy. S. aureus was the most common extracted organism found in these samples and had the highest degree of agreement.