Thakkar, Punam

ObjectivesMicrovascular free tissue transfer is routinely used for reconstructing midface defects in patients with malignancy, however, studies regarding reconstructive outcomes in invasive fungal sinusitis (IFS) are lacking. We aim to describe outcomes of free flap reconstruction for IFS defects, determine the optimal time to perform reconstruction, and if anti‐fungal medications or other risk factors of an immunocompromised patient population affect reconstructive outcomes.MethodsRetrospective review of reconstruction for IFS (2010–2022). Age, BMI, hemoglobin A1c, number of surgical debridements, and interval from the last debridement to reconstruction were compared between patients with delayed wound healing versus those without. Predictor variables for delayed wound healing and the effect of time on free flap reconstruction were analyzed.ResultsTwenty‐seven patients underwent free flap reconstruction for IFS. Three patients were immunocompromised from leukemia and 21 had diabetes mellitus (DM). Patients underwent an average of four surgical debridements for treatment of IFS. The interval from the last IFS debridement to flap reconstruction was 5.58 months (±5.5). Seven flaps (25.9%) had delayed wound healing. A shorter interval of less than 2 months between the last debridement for IFS and reconstructive free flap procedure was associated with delayed wound healing (Fisher Exact Test p = 0.0062). Other factors including DM, BMI, HgA1c, and bone reconstruction were not associated with delayed wound healing.ConclusionPatients with maxillectomy defects from IFS can undergo microvascular‐free flap reconstruction with good outcomes while on anti‐fungal medication. Early reconstruction in the first 2 months after the last IFS debridement is associated with delayed wound healing.Level of Evidence4 Laryngoscope, 134:1642–1647, 2024

ObjectiveNonphysician health care workers are involved in high‐risk patient care during the COVID‐19 pandemic, placing them at high risk of mental health burden. The mental health impact of COVID‐19 in this crucial population has not been studied thus far. Thus, the objective of this study is to assess the psychosocial well‐being of these providers.Study DesignNational cross‐sectional online survey (no control group).SettingAcademic otolaryngology programs in the United States.Subjects and MethodsWe distributed a survey to nonphysician health care workers in otolaryngology departments across the United States. The survey incorporated a variety of validated mental health assessment tools to measure participant burnout (Mini‐Z assessment), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder–7), distress (Impact of Event Scale), and depression (Patient Health Questionnaire–2). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine predictive factors associated with these mental health outcomes.ResultsWe received 347 survey responses: 248 (71.5%) nurses, 63 (18.2%) administrative staff, and 36 (10.4%) advanced practice providers. A total of 104 (30.0%) respondents reported symptoms of burnout; 241 (69.5%), symptoms of anxiety; 292 (84.1%), symptoms of at least mild distress; and 79 (22.8%), symptoms of depression. Upon further analysis, development of these symptoms was associated with factors such as occupation, practice setting, and case load.ConclusionFrontline otolaryngology health care providers exhibit high rates of mental health complications, particularly anxiety and distress, in the wake of COVID‐19. Adequate support systems must be put into place to address these issues.

AbstractBackgroundOtolaryngologists are among the highest risk for COVID‐19 exposure.MethodsThis is a cross‐sectional, survey‐based, national study evaluating academic otolaryngologists. Burnout, anxiety, distress, and depression were assessed by the single‐item Mini‐Z Burnout Assessment, 7‐item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale, 15‐item Impact of Event Scale, and 2‐item Patient Health Questionnaire, respectively.ResultsA total of 349 physicians completed the survey. Of them, 165 (47.3%) were residents and 212 (60.7%) were males. Anxiety, distress, burnout, and depression were reported in 167 (47.9%), 210 (60.2%), 76 (21.8%), and 37 (10.6%) physicians, respectively. Attendings had decreased burnout relative to residents (odds ratio [OR] 0.28, confidence interval [CI] [0.11‐0.68];P= .005). Females had increased burnout (OR 1.93, CI [1.12.‐3.32];P= .018), anxiety (OR 2.53, CI [1.59‐4.02];P< .005), and distress (OR 2.68, CI [1.64‐4.37];P< .005). Physicians in states with greater than 20 000 positive cases had increased distress (OR 2.01, CI [1.22‐3.31];P= .006).ConclusionDuring the COVID‐19 pandemic, the prevalence of burnout, anxiety, and distress is high among academic otolaryngologists.