The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic impact on rhinology research: A survey of the American Rhinologic Society

Physician views of artificial intelligence in otolaryngology and rhinology: A mixed methods study

Objective

The study aimed to investigate otolaryngologists' knowledge, trust, acceptance, and concerns with clinical applications of artificial intelligence (AI).

Methods

This study used mixed methods with survey and semistructured interviews. Survey was e-mailed to American Rhinologic Society members, of which a volunteer sample of 86 members responded. Nineteen otolaryngologists were purposefully recruited and interviewed until thematic saturation was achieved.

Results

Seventy-six respondents (10% response rate) completed the majority of the survey: 49% worked in academic settings and 43% completed residency 10 or fewer years ago. Of 19 interviewees, 58% worked in academic settings, and 47% completed residency 10 or fewer years ago. Familiarity: Only 8% of survey respondents reported having AI training in residency, although 72% had familiarity with general AI concepts; 0 interviewees had personal experience with AI in clinical settings. Expected uses: Of the surveyed otolaryngologists, 82% would use an AI-based clinical decision aid and 74% were comfortable with AI proposing treatment recommendations. However, only 44% of participants would trust AI to identify malignancy and 53% to interpret radiographic images. Interviewees trusted AI for simple tasks, such as labeling septal deviation, more than complex ones, such as identifying tumors. Factors influencing AI adoption: 89% of survey participants would use AI if it improved patient satisfaction, 78% would be willing to use AI if experts and studies validated the technologies, and 73% would only use AI if it increased efficiency. Sixty-one percent of survey respondents expected AI incorporation into clinical practice within 5 years. Interviewees emphasized that AI adoption depends on its similarity to their clinical judgment and to expert opinion. Concerns included nuanced or complex cases, poor design or accuracy, and the personal nature of physician-patient relationships.

Conclusion

Few physicians have experience with AI technologies but expect rapid adoption in the clinic, highlighting the urgent need for clinical education and research. Otolaryngologists are most receptive to AI "augmenting" physician expertise and administrative capacity, with respect for physician autonomy and maintaining relationships with patients.

Level of Evidence

Level VI, descriptive or qualitative study.

Conducting health services research during the COVID-19 pandemic: experiences from the veterans health administration

BACKGROUND

Health services researchers within the Veterans Health Administration (VA) seek to improve the delivery of care to the Veteran population, whose medical needs often differ from the general population. The COVID-19 pandemic and restricted access to medical centers and offices forced VA researchers and staff to transition to remote work. This study aimed to characterize the work experience of health service researchers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

A REDCap survey developed from the management literature was distributed in July 2020 to 800 HSR&D researchers and staff affiliated with VA Centers of Innovation. We requested recipients to forward the survey to VA colleagues. Descriptive analyses and logistic regression modeling were conducted on multiple choice and Likert scaled items. Manifest content analysis was conducted on open-text responses.

RESULTS

Responses were received from 473 researchers and staff from 37 VA Medical Centers. About half (48%; n = 228) of VA HSR&D researchers and staff who responded to the survey experienced some interference with their research due to the COVID-19 pandemic, yet 55% (n = 260) reported their programs of research did not slow or stop. Clinician investigators reported significantly greater odds of interference than non-clinician investigators and support staff. The most common barriers to working remotely were loss of face-to-face interactions with colleagues (56%; n = 263) and absence of daily routines (25%; n = 118). Strategies teams used to address COVID-19 related remote work challenges included videoconferencing (79%; n = 375), virtual get-togethers (48%; n = 225), altered timelines (42%; n = 199), daily email updates (30%; n = 143) and virtual team huddles (16%; n = 74). Pre-pandemic VA information technology structures along with systems created to support multidisciplinary research teams working across a national healthcare system maintained and enhanced staff engagement and well-being.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identifies how the VA structures and systems put in place prior to the COVID-19 pandemic to support a dispersed workforce enabled the continuation of vital scientific research, staff engagement and well-being during a global pandemic. These findings can inform remote work policies and practices for researchers during the current and future crises.

Otolaryngologist perceptions of AI-based sinus CT interpretation

BACKGROUND

Overcoming non-standardization, vagueness, and subjectivity in sinus CT radiology reports is an ongoing need, particularly in keeping with data-driven healthcare initiatives. Our aim was to explore otolaryngologists' perceptions of quantitative objective disease measures as enabled by AI-based analysis, and determine preferences for sinus CT interpretation.

METHODS

A multi-methods design was used. We administered a survey to American Rhinologic Society members and conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposeful sample of otolaryngologists and rhinologists from varying backgrounds, practice settings and locations during 2020-2021. Interview topics included sinus CT reports, familiarity with AI-based analysis, and potential requisites for its future implementation. Interviews were then coded for content analysis. Differences in survey responses were calculated using Chi-squared test.

RESULTS

120 of 955 surveys were returned, and 19 otolaryngologists (8 rhinologists) were interviewed. Survey data revealed more trust in conventional radiologist reports, but that AI-based reports would be more systematic and comprehensive. Interviews expanded on these results. Interviewees believed that conventional sinus CT reports had limited utility due to inconsistent content. However, they described relying on them for reporting incidental extra-sinus findings. Reporting could be improved with standardization and more detailed anatomical analysis. Interviewees expressed interest in AI-derived analysis given potential for standardization, although they desired evidence of accuracy and reproducibility to gain trust in AI-based reports.

CONCLUSIONS

Sinus CT interpretation has shortcomings in its current state. Standardization and objectivity could be aided with deep learning-enabled quantitative analysis, although clinicians desire thorough validation to gain trust in the technology prior to its implementation.

COVID-19 and rhinological surgery

The Coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused disruptions in the normal patient care workflow, necessitating adaptations within the healthcare profession. The objective of this article is to outline some of these adaptations and considerations necessitated by COVID-19 within the subspeciality of rhinology and endoscopic skull base surgery.

Otolaryngology in the face of A pandemic

Although infrequent, pandemics are serious public health concerns with unpredictable courses. The COVID-19 pandemic began over 2 years ago and is far from over. This pandemic has spread rapidly throughout the world and led to several million deaths, making it commonly compared to the deadly Spanish influenza pandemic. Policy and safety measures are constantly being adapted to reduce transmission rates. The pandemic places stress on all healthcare workers, but especially otolaryngology providers due to their direct contact with airway connected cavities. This puts them at high risk for infection and has impacted inpatient and outpatient otolaryngology care, as well as education, research, and mental health.

The initial impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on epilepsy research

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the face of many practices throughout the world. Through necessity to minimize spread and provide clinical care to those with severe disease, focus has been on limiting face-to-face contact. Research in many areas has been put on hold. We sought to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on epilepsy research from international basic science and clinical researchers. Responses to five questions were solicited through a convenience sample by direct email and through postings on the ILAE social media accounts and an ILAE online platform (utilizing Slack). Information was collected from 15 respondents in 11 countries by email or via Zoom interviews between May 19, 2020, and June 4, 2020. Several themes emerged including a move to virtual working, project delays with laboratory work halted and clinical work reduced, funding concerns, a worry about false data with regard to COVID research and concern about research time lost. However, a number of positive outcomes were highlighted, not least the efficiency of online working and other adaptations that could be sustained in the future.

Professional and personal impact of the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions on non-COVID-19-related clinical research

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to major disruptions in the clinical research enterprise. Investigators and staff at the University of Washington and Seattle Children’s Research Institute (SCRI) were surveyed to determine the impact of the pandemic restrictions on their non-COVID-19 clinical research studies. Enrollment and study visits were stopped for over half of the interventional trials. There were both positive and negative impacts of the work restrictions on the professional and personal lives of faculty and staff. Academic and research institutions should consider how best to support investigators and their teams during this pandemic.