Carlson, Matthew L.

Objective To introduce and discuss implementation strategy for the Complete Cochlear Implant Care (CCIC) model, a highly-coordinated cochlear implant (CI) care delivery model requiring a single on-site visit for preoperative workup, surgery, and postoperative programming. Study Design Prospective, nonrandomized, two-arm clinical trial. Setting Tertiary referral CI center. Patients Adults who meet audiologic criteria for cochlear implantation. Interventions Cochlear implantation, coordinated care delivery, including remote programming. Main outcome measures Care delivery model feasibility and process implementation. Results Patients determined to be likely CI candidates based on routine audiometry are eligible for enrollment. The CCIC model uses telemedicine and electronic educational materials to prepare patients for same-day on-site consultation with CI surgery, same or next-day activation, and postoperative remote programming for 12 months. Implementation challenges include overcoming inertia related to the implementation of a new clinical workflow, whereas scalability of the CCIC model is limited by current hardware requirements for remote programming technology. A dedicated CCIC process coordinator is critical for overcoming obstacles in implementation and process improvement through feedback and iterative changes. Team and patient-facing materials are included and should be tailored to fit each unique CI program looking to implement CCIC. Conclusion The CCIC model has the potential to dramatically streamline hearing healthcare delivery. Implementation requires an adaptive approach, as obstacles may vary according to institutional infrastructure and policies.

Objective: To present key data from a private marketing report that characterizes US hearing aid (HA) utilization, HA candidate and user population sizes, and HA pricing. Patients: HA candidates and users in the United States. Interventions: Hearing amplification. Main Outcome Measures: HA utilization, HA candidate and user population sizes, HA market size and value, and HA pricing. Results: In 2015, an estimated 8.5 million HA users accounted for a total of 15.4 million individual HA devices in the United States. Approximately 81% of HA users owned bilateral devices. In 2015, approximately 87% of devices were purchased as replacements by current HA users, while the remaining 13% of devices were purchased by new HA users. HA utilization rates among the candidate population approximated 21% in 2015, which was stable over the 3-year study period. In 2015, there was a net increase of 696,060 individuals who met HA candidacy criteria but did not undergo treatment with HAs, adding to the backlog of 31.0 million untreated HA candidates who existed before that year. The HA market was valued at $6.0 billion in 2015, with an average retail selling price of $1798 per device ($3596 per pair). In the same year, the average manufacturer selling price was $495 per device ($990 per pair), or nearly 1 quarter of the retail price. Conclusions: HAs are substantially under-utilized in the United States with an annually growing backlog of untreated HA candidates.

OBJECTIVE The goal of microsurgical resection of vestibular schwannoma (VS) is gross-total resection (GTR) to provide oncological cure. However, a popular strategy is to halt the resection if the surgical team feels the risk of cranial nerve injury is imminent, achieving a maximally safe subtotal resection (STR) instead. The tumor remnant can then be treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) once the patient has recovered from the immediate postoperative period, or it can be followed with serial imaging and treated with SRS in a delayed fashion if residual tumor growth is seen. In this study, the authors evaluated the efficacy of this multimodality approach, particularly the influence of timing and dose of SRS on radiological tumor control, need for salvage treatment, and cranial nerve function. METHODS VS patients treated with initial microsurgery and subsequent radiosurgery were retrospectively included from two tertiary treatment centers and dichotomized depending on whether SRS was given upfront (defined as before 12 months) or later. Radiological tumor control was defined as less than 20% tumor volume expansion and oncological tumor control as an absence of salvage treatment. Facial and cochlear nerve functions were assessed after surgery, at the time of SRS, and at last follow-up. Finally, a systematic literature review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS A total of 110 VS patients underwent SRS following microsurgical resection, with a mean preradiosurgical tumor volume of 2.2 cm3 (SD 2.5 cm3) and mean post-SRS follow-up time of 5.8 years (SD 4.1 years). The overall radiological tumor control and oncological tumor control were 77.3% and 90.9%, respectively. Thirty-five patients (31.8%) received upfront SRS, while 75 patients (68.2%) were observed for a minimum of 12 months prior to SRS. The timing of SRS did not influence the radiological tumor control (p = 0.869), the oncological tumor control (p = 0.560), or facial nerve (p = 0.413) or cochlear nerve (p = 0.954) function. An escalated marginal dose (> 12 Gy) was associated with greater tumor shrinkage (p = 0.020) and superior radiological tumor control (p = 0.020), but it did not influence the risk of salvage treatment (p = 0.904) or facial (p = 0.351) or cochlear (p = 0.601) nerve deterioration. CONCLUSIONS Delayed SRS after close observation of residuals following STR is a safe alternative to upfront SRS regarding tumor control and cranial nerve preservation in selected patients.

Objective To characterize current awareness, perceptions, and literacy surrounding hearing loss among United States primary healthcare professionals. Study design National cross-sectional survey study. Setting United States. Participants Four hundred six healthcare professionals. Results Survey respondents included 205 primary care physicians and 201 nurse practitioners or physician assistants. When compared with 10 other common health conditions, only 1% of respondents ranked hearing loss as a “most important” health condition to manage. Less than half of providers reported recommending hearing testing for their patients at least once per year, whereas evaluation of blood pressure, total cholesterol, body mass index, and blood glucose levels are recommended at least annually by more than 80% of providers. Although 95% of respondents indicated that it is somewhat important or very important for patients to know the standard definition for normal hearing, only 57% of surveyed providers know of a standard definition themselves, and only 28% reported familiarity with the concept of “20/20 hearing.” Conversely, more than 80% of respondents know the “normal” metric for blood pressure, total cholesterol, body mass index, blood glucose, and vision. Most respondents realize that hearing is important to overall health and hearing loss can impact personal safety, lead to social isolation, and negatively impact quality of life. Fifty-four percent also acknowledged a link between hearing loss and depression, but a majority were not very aware of the relationship of hearing loss to risk of falling and dementia, reduced income and job opportunities, and type 2 diabetes. Importantly, only 40% of providers believe hearing loss is treatable, and only 17% believe it is preventable. Conclusion Despite widespread literacy of what constitutes normal blood pressure, total cholesterol, body mass index, blood glucose, and vision metrics, healthcare providers exhibit a poor understanding of normal hearing levels. Few providers prioritize hearing health or regularly recommend for annual hearing evaluation. Most providers believe that options for people with hearing loss are limited, which may have important implications for prioritizing discussion of hearing loss with patients.

AbstractObjectiveTo comprehensively review the recent published literature to characterize current trends of burnout and well‐being among otolaryngology trainees.MethodsStudy design: systematic review and meta‐analysis. A comprehensive literature review from 2000 to 2021 of studies related to otolaryngology resident burnout and well‐being, as well as the general topic of well‐being among surgical residents was completed. All included studies were summarized qualitatively. For the quantitative analysis, only articles reporting a Maslach burnout inventory (MBI), modified MBI or Mini‐Z‐ Burnout assessment were included.ResultsTwenty‐five articles were included in the qualitative summary and nine articles in the quantitative analysis. In the qualitative summary, trainees were reported to have increased levels of distress and emotional hardening compared to attending otolaryngologists. Total hours worked per week and female gender were associated with worsened well‐being. Residency program strategies to improve trainee well‐being include program‐sponsored wellness activities, dedicated wellness champions, and assistance with clerical burden. Implementation of protected nonclinical time has been shown to decrease burnout and increase well‐being among trainees. Moreover, formal trainee mentorship programs have also been shown to reduce trainee burnout and stress. In the quantitative analysis, rates of trainee burnout ranged from 29.7% to 86% with an overall trend towards reduced rates of burnout from 2006 to 2021. Utilizing a weighted average, the overall burnout among otolaryngology residents was 58.6%.ConclusionsRates of burnout remain high among otolaryngology trainees. Implementing formal mentorship programs and providing protected time during regular work hours appear to be effective tools to improve resident well‐being.

Standard clinical protocols require hearing protection during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for patient safety. This investigation prospectively evaluated the auditory function impact of acoustic noise exposure during a 3.0T MRI in healthy adults. Twenty-nine participants with normal hearing underwent a comprehensive audiologic assessment before and immediately following a clinically indicated head MRI. Appropriate hearing protection with earplugs (and pads) was used per standard of practice. To characterize noise hazards, current sound monitoring tools were used to measure levels of pulse sequences measured. A third audiologic test was performed if a significant threshold shift (STS) was identified at the second test, within 30 days post MRI. Some sequences produced high levels (up to 114.5 dBA; 129 dB peak SPL) that required hearing protection but did not exceed 100% daily noise dose. One participant exhibited an STS in the frequency region most highly associated with noise-induced hearing loss. No participants experienced OSHA-defined STS in either ear. Overall, OAE measures did not show evidence of changes in cochlear function after MRI. In conclusion, hearing threshold shifts associated with hearing loss or OAE level shifts reflecting underlying cochlear damage were not detected in any of the 3.0T MRI study participants who used the current recommended hearing protection.

Objective: To present key data from a private marketing report that characterizes U.S. cochlear implant (CI) utilization, potential CI candidate and recipient population sizes, and CI market growth. Patients: Individuals who may benefit from CI and CI recipients in the United States. Interventions: Cochlear implantation. Main outcome measures: CI utilization, potential CI candidate and recipient population sizes, and CI market size and value. Results: As of 2015, a cumulative 170,252 people (240,056 devices) had undergone cochlear implantation in the United States. In the year 2015, approximately 30% of devices were implanted in bilateral CI patients, through simultaneous or sequential implantation. When considering traditional audiometric CI candidacy criteria (patients with severe to profound sensorineural hearing loss in the better hearing ear), utilization rates among the population who may benefit from CI approximated 12.7%. When considering expanded criteria including individuals with single-sided deafness or asymmetrical hearing loss (severe to profound hearing loss in the worse hearing ear), utilization rates approximated 2.1%. In 2015, there was a net increase of 20,093 individuals who may have benefited from CI who had not undergone CI, adding to the group of about 1.3 M untreated audiometric CI candidates who existed prior to that year. The CI market was valued at $450.8 M in 2015, with an average device selling price of $25,701 per device. Conclusions: CI utilization rates remain low among individuals who meet audiometric criteria for CI. Although the annual proportion of CI recipients to new audiometric candidates has increased, the total population of untreated audiometric CI candidates continues to rise.

Background: Instruments to assess surgical skills have been validated for several key indicator procedures in otolaryngology. Selective neck dissection is a core procedure for which trainees must integrate knowledge of complex head and neck anatomy with technical surgical skills. An instrument for assessment of surgical performance in selective neck dissection has not been previously developed. The objective of the current study is to develop and validate an instrument for assessing surgical competency for level II-IV selective neck dissection. Design: A Delphi working group comprised of 23 fellowship trained head and neck surgeons from 17 institutions was assembled. The modified Delphi method encompassed a 3-step process, including 2 anonymous voting rounds to successively refine individual items and establish levels of consensus. Thresholds for achieving strong consensus, at >80% agreement, were determined a priori. The resulting instrument was subsequently validated in a prospective cohort of 17 resident surgeons, spanning postgraduate year 1 to 5 training experience. Participants were asked to perform a level II-IV selective neck dissection on fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens. Performance was scored by 2 independent, blinded observers using the devised instrument and construct validity was assessed. Results: Through the modified Delphi process a final list of 30 items, considered to be the most essential items for achieving the goals of a level II-IV selective neck dissection, was developed. Construct validity was supported by a positive association between instrument scores compared to both resident postgraduate year level and number of head and neck rotations completed. Conclusion: The development and validation of a novel instrument for assessment of surgical competency in level II-IV selective neck dissection, a key indicator case in otolaryngology, is described. This new instrument may be used to provide objective feedback on overall and task-specific competency to identify surgical deficiencies and offer granular feedback to enhance surgical training.