Pain control is comparable between opioid versus non-opioid management after otolaryngology procedures

Objective

The current study aims to measure patient-reported satisfaction with pain control using opioid and non-opioid medications after undergoing the following otolaryngology procedures: parathyroidectomy, thyroid lobectomy, total thyroidectomy, and bilateral tonsillectomy.

Materials and Methods

A prospective cohort study was performed at an academic medical center that included a telephone questionnaire and chart review. Opioid prescriptions, usage, and patient-reported pain outcomes were recorded. Bivariate analyses were used to compare opioid and non-opioid users.

Results

Of the 107 total patients undergoing otolaryngology procedures included in the study, 49 (45.8%) used an opioid for pain management postoperatively and 58 (54.2%) did not. Among the 81 patients who underwent endocrine procedures (parathyroidectomy, total thyroidectomy/lobectomy), most patients reported being "very satisfied" or "satisfied" with pain control whether they used opioids (n = 27/30, 90%) or not (n = 50/51, 98%). Of the 26 patients who underwent bilateral tonsillectomy, 19 (73%) were prescribed opioids and among these, most (n = 17/19, 89%) reported they were "very satisfied" or "satisfied" with pain control. In the non-opioid usage group, all patients (n = 7/7, 100%) reported they were "satisfied" with pain control. There was no statistically significant difference in patient-reported satisfaction with pain control between opioid and non-opioid users for any of the procedures listed.

Conclusion

The results of our study suggest that patients who did not use opioids have a similar level of satisfaction with pain control compared to those using opioids after thyroid, parathyroid and tonsillectomy surgeries. Considering the magnitude of the opioid crisis, providers should reassess the need for opioid prescriptions following certain ENT procedures.

Level of Evidence

IV.

A Case Report of Refractory Postherpetic Neuralgia After Ramsay Hunt Syndrome Treated With Tympanic Nerve Neurectomy

Ramsay Hunt syndrome is a facial nerve palsy that arises from herpes zoster infection. In rare cases, postherpetic neuralgia is a complication following Ramsay Hunt syndrome. Pain management to address postherpetic neuralgia includes facial nerve blocks, medications such as gabapentin, carbamazepine and botulinum toxin injections, and pulsed radiofrequency. Despite the reported benefits for patients with glossopharyngeal nerve pain, neurectomy as a treatment has rarely been described. A 45-year-old patient visited our ENT clinic for chronic right-sided facial, ear, and jaw pain that persisted for 9 years following the development of Ramsay Hunt syndrome. She trialed multiple medications including gabapentin, carbamazepine, and botulinum toxin injections with minimal relief to her symptoms. The patient underwent a diagnostic myringotomy with topical application of lidocaine to the tympanic nerve. This resulted in temporary relief of her pain until the effects of the lidocaine subsided. The patient was subsequently offered lysis of the right tympanic nerve for more definitive management. The patient experienced significant pain reduction after the right tympanic neurectomy procedure. Chronic postherpetic neuralgia following Ramsay Hunt syndrome can cause significant impairment in a patient's quality of life. For patients with ear pain refractory to conservative management, a tympanic neurectomy can be considered.

Current patterns of trauma center proliferation have not led to proportionate improvements in access to care or mortality after injury: An ecologic study

BACKGROUND

Timely access to high-level (I/II) trauma centers (HLTCs) is essential to minimize mortality after injury. Over the last 15 years, there has been a proliferation of HLTC nationally. The current study evaluates the impact of additional HLTC on population access and injury mortality.

METHODS

A geocoded list of HLTC, with year designated, was obtained from the American Trauma Society, and 60-minute travel time polygons were created using OpenStreetMap data. Census block group population centroids, county population centroids, and American Communities Survey data from 2005 and 2020 were integrated. Age-adjusted nonoverdose injury mortality was obtained from CDC Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Geographically weighted regression models were used to identify independent predictors of HLTC access and injury mortality.

RESULTS

Over the 15-year (2005-2020) study period, the number of HLTC increased by 31.0% (445 to 583), while population access to HLTC increased by 6.9% (77.5-84.4%). Despite this increase, access was unchanged in 83.1% of counties, with a median change in access of 0.0% (interquartile range, 0.0-1.1%). Population-level age-adjusted injury mortality rates increased by 5.39 per 100,000 population during this time (60.72 to 66.11 per 100,000). Geographically weighted regression controlling for population demography and health indicators found higher median income and higher population density to be positively associated with majority (≥50%) HLTC population coverage and negatively associated with county-level nonoverdose mortality.

CONCLUSION

Over the past 15 years, the number of HLTC increased 31%, while population access to HLTC increased only 6.9%. High-level (I/II) trauma center designation is likely driven by factors other than population need. To optimize efficiency and decrease potential oversupply, the designation process should include population level metrics. Geographic information system methodology can be an effective tool to assess optimal placement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.

Pediatric trauma mortality in India and the United States: A comparison and risk-adjusted analysis

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of research comparing pediatric risk-adjusted trauma mortality between high-income and low- and middle-income countries. This limits identification of populations and injury patterns for targeted interventions. We aim to compare independent predictors of pediatric trauma mortality between India and the United States (US).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted for pediatric patients (age <18 years) in India's Towards Improved Trauma Care Outcomes (TITCO) project database and the US National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) from 2013 to 2015. Demographic, injury, physiologic, anatomic and outcome data were analyzed. Multivariable regressions were used to determine independent predictors of mortality.

RESULTS

126,678 pediatric trauma patients were included (India 3,373; US 123,305). Pediatric patients in India were on average significantly younger, with a higher median injury severity score (ISS), had lower systolic blood pressure, and suffered a higher case fatality rate (13.0% vs. 1.0%). When controlling for demographic, mechanism, physiologic, and anatomic injury characteristics, sustaining an injury in India was the strongest predictor of mortality (OR 22.70, 95% CI 18.70-27.56). On subgroup analysis, the highest relative odds of mortality in India was seen in children with lower injury and physiologic severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk-adjusted pediatric trauma-related mortality is significantly higher in India compared to the US. The comparative odds of mortality are highest among children with lower injury and physiologic severity. This suggests that low-cost targeted interventions focused on standard timely trauma care, protocols, training and early imaging could improve pediatric injury mortality in India.

TYPE OF STUDY

Retrospective Prognosis Study LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Assessment of Stakeholder Engagement in a Down Syndrome Research Study

There is growing recognition of the importance of engaging patients early in the design of research studies. For studies involving patients with intellectual and cognitive disabilities, researchers may consider engaging with family caregivers, health professionals, community advocates, and/or subject matter experts to provide a more multifaceted, surrogate perspective. Evaluating the engagement of these stakeholder groups in research is nascent, and tools are limited. Research studies involving these individuals provide the opportunity to test new methods of measurement of stakeholder engagement in research. We conducted a 3-year research study implementing and evaluating Down Syndrome Clinic to You, an online platform for caregivers of individuals with Down syndrome who do not have access to Down syndrome specialists. We established 3 key stakeholder groups - family caregivers, primary care physicians, and medical/scientific experts in the field - who were involved from grant-writing through preparation of the final report. To assess stakeholder engagement, we utilized the Patient Engagement in Research Scale, a validated instrument originally developed to evaluate patient engagement in arthritis research. Overall, results were suggestive of strong engagement levels by the key stakeholder groups. This study contributes to the limited available literature evaluating measures of stakeholder engagement in research.