Kaparaboyna Ashok Kumar

Clinical practice guideline: acute otitis externa.

Objective This clinical practice guideline is an update and replacement for an earlier guideline published in 2006 by the American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation. This update provides evidence-based recommendations to manage acute otitis externa (AOE), defined as diffuse inflammation of the external ear canal, which may also involve the pinna or tympanic membrane. The variations in management of AOE and the importance of accurate diagnosis suggest a need for updating the clinical practice guideline. The primary outcome considered in this guideline is clinical resolution of AOE. Purpose The primary purpose of the original guideline was to promote appropriate use of oral and topical antimicrobials for AOE and to highlight the need for adequate pain relief. An updated guideline is needed because of new clinical trials, new systematic reviews, and the lack of consumer participation in the initial guideline development group. The target patient is aged 2 years or older with diffuse AOE. Differential diagnosis will be discussed, but recommendations for management will be limited to diffuse AOE, which is almost exclusively a bacterial infection. This guideline is intended for primary care and specialist clinicians, including otolaryngologists–head and neck surgeons, pediatricians, family physicians, emergency physicians, internists, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants. This guideline is applicable in any setting in which patients with diffuse AOE would be identified, monitored, or managed. Action Statements The development group made strong recommendations that (1) clinicians should assess patients with AOE for pain and recommend analgesic treatment based on the severity of pain and (2) clinicians should not prescribe systemic antimicrobials as initial therapy for diffuse, uncomplicated AOE unless there is extension outside the ear canal or the presence of specific host factors that would indicate a need for systemic therapy. The development group made recommendations that (1) clinicians should distinguish diffuse AOE from other causes of otalgia, otorrhea, and inflammation of the external ear canal; (2) clinicians should assess the patient with diffuse AOE for factors that modify management (nonintact tympanic membrane, tympanostomy tube, diabetes, immunocompromised state, prior radiotherapy); (3) clinicians should prescribe topical preparations for initial therapy of diffuse, uncomplicated AOE; (4) clinicians should enhance the delivery of topical drops by informing the patient how to administer topical drops and by performing aural toilet, placing a wick, or both, when the ear canal is obstructed; (5) clinicians should prescribe a non-ototoxic preparation when the patient has a known or suspected perforation of the tympanic membrane, including a tympanostomy tube; and (6) clinicians should reassess the patient who fails to respond to the initial therapeutic option within 48 to 72 hours to confirm the diagnosis of diffuse AOE and to exclude other causes of illness.

Clinical Practice Guideline (Update): Adult Sinusitis

Objective This update of a 2007 guideline from the American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation provides evidence-based recommendations to manage adult rhinosinusitis, defined as symptomatic inflammation of the paranasal sinuses and nasal cavity. Changes from the prior guideline include a consumer added to the update group, evidence from 42 new systematic reviews, enhanced information on patient education and counseling, a new algorithm to clarify action statement relationships, expanded opportunities for watchful waiting (without antibiotic therapy) as initial therapy of acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS), and 3 new recommendations for managing chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). Purpose The purpose of this multidisciplinary guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities in managing adult rhinosinusitis and to create explicit and actionable recommendations to implement these opportunities in clinical practice. Specifically, the goals are to improve diagnostic accuracy for adult rhinosinusitis, promote appropriate use of ancillary tests to confirm diagnosis and guide management, and promote judicious use of systemic and topical therapy, which includes radiography, nasal endoscopy, computed tomography, and testing for allergy and immune function. Emphasis was also placed on identifying multiple chronic conditions that would modify management of rhinosinusitis, including asthma, cystic fibrosis, immunocompromised state, and ciliary dyskinesia. Action statements The update group made strong recommendations that clinicians (1) should distinguish presumed ABRS from acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) caused by viral upper respiratory infections and noninfectious conditions and (2) should confirm a clinical diagnosis of CRS with objective documentation of sinonasal inflammation, which may be accomplished using anterior rhinoscopy, nasal endoscopy, or computed tomography. The update group made recommendations that clinicians (1) should either offer watchful waiting (without antibiotics) or prescribe initial antibiotic therapy for adults with uncomplicated ABRS; (2) should prescribe amoxicillin with or without clavulanate as first-line therapy for 5 to 10 days (if a decision is made to treat ABRS with an antibiotic); (3) should reassess the patient to confirm ABRS, exclude other causes of illness, and detect complications if the patient worsens or fails to improve with the initial management option by 7 days after diagnosis or worsens during the initial management; (4) should distinguish CRS and recurrent ARS from isolated episodes of ABRS and other causes of sinonasal symptoms; (5) should assess the patient with CRS or recurrent ARS for multiple chronic conditions that would modify management, such as asthma, cystic fibrosis, immunocompromised state, and ciliary dyskinesia; (6) should confirm the presence or absence of nasal polyps in a patient with CRS; and (7) should recommend saline nasal irrigation, topical intranasal corticosteroids, or both for symptom relief of CRS. The update group stated as options that clinicians may (1) recommend analgesics, topical intranasal steroids, and/or nasal saline irrigation for symptomatic relief of viral rhinosinusitis; (2) recommend analgesics, topical intranasal steroids, and/or nasal saline irrigation) for symptomatic relief of ABRS; and (3) obtain testing for allergy and immune function in evaluating a patient with CRS or recurrent ARS. The update group made recommendations that clinicians (1) should not obtain radiographic imaging for patients who meet diagnostic criteria for ARS, unless a complication or alternative diagnosis is suspected, and (2) should not prescribe topical or systemic antifungal therapy for patients with CRS.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Bell’s Palsy

Objective Bell’s palsy, named after the Scottish anatomist, Sir Charles Bell, is the most common acute mono-neuropathy, or disorder affecting a single nerve, and is the most common diagnosis associated with facial nerve weakness/paralysis. Bell’s palsy is a rapid unilateral facial nerve paresis (weakness) or paralysis (complete loss of movement) of unknown cause. The condition leads to the partial or complete inability to voluntarily move facial muscles on the affected side of the face. Although typically self-limited, the facial paresis/paralysis that occurs in Bell’s palsy may cause significant temporary oral incompetence and an inability to close the eyelid, leading to potential eye injury. Additional long-term poor outcomes do occur and can be devastating to the patient. Treatments are generally designed to improve facial function and facilitate recovery. There are myriad treatment options for Bell’s palsy, and some controversy exists regarding the effectiveness of several of these options, and there are consequent variations in care. In addition, numerous diagnostic tests available are used in the evaluation of patients with Bell’s palsy. Many of these tests are of questionable benefit in Bell’s palsy. Furthermore, while patients with Bell’s palsy enter the health care system with facial paresis/paralysis as a primary complaint, not all patients with facial paresis/paralysis have Bell’s palsy. It is a concern that patients with alternative underlying etiologies may be misdiagnosed or have unnecessary delay in diagnosis. All of these quality concerns provide an important opportunity for improvement in the diagnosis and management of patients with Bell’s palsy. Purpose The primary purpose of this guideline is to improve the accuracy of diagnosis for Bell’s palsy, to improve the quality of care and outcomes for patients with Bell’s palsy, and to decrease harmful variations in the evaluation and management of Bell’s palsy. This guideline addresses these needs by encouraging accurate and efficient diagnosis and treatment and, when applicable, facilitating patient follow-up to address the management of long-term sequelae or evaluation of new or worsening symptoms not indicative of Bell’s palsy. The guideline is intended for all clinicians in any setting who are likely to diagnose and manage patients with Bell’s palsy. The target population is inclusive of both adults and children presenting with Bell’s palsy. Action Statements The development group made a strong recommendation that (a) clinicians should assess the patient using history and physical examination to exclude identifiable causes of facial paresis or paralysis in patients presenting with acute-onset unilateral facial paresis or paralysis, (b) clinicians should prescribe oral steroids within 72 hours of symptom onset for Bell’s palsy patients 16 years and older, (c) clinicians should not prescribe oral antiviral therapy alone for patients with new-onset Bell’s palsy, and (d) clinicians should implement eye protection for Bell’s palsy patients with impaired eye closure. The panel made recommendations that (a) clinicians should not obtain routine laboratory testing in patients with new-onset Bell’s palsy, (b) clinicians should not routinely perform diagnostic imaging for patients with new-onset Bell’s palsy, (c) clinicians should not perform electrodiagnostic testing in Bell’s palsy patients with incomplete facial paralysis, and (d) clinicians should reassess or refer to a facial nerve specialist those Bell’s palsy patients with (1) new or worsening neurologic findings at any point, (2) ocular symptoms developing at any point, or (3) incomplete facial recovery 3 months after initial symptom onset. The development group provided the following options: (a) clinicians may offer oral antiviral therapy in addition to oral steroids within 72 hours of symptom onset for patients with Bell’s palsy, and (b) clinicians may offer electrodiagnostic testing to Bell’s palsy patients with complete facial paralysis. The development group offered the following no recommendations: (a) no recommendation can be made regarding surgical decompression for patients with Bell’s palsy, (b) no recommendation can be made regarding the effect of acupuncture in patients with Bell’s palsy, and (c) no recommendation can be made regarding the effect of physical therapy in patients with Bell’s palsy.

Clinical practice guideline (update): Adult sinusitis executive summary

The American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation has published a supplement to this issue featuring the updated “Clinical Practice Guideline: Adult Sinusitis” as a supplement to Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery. To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 14 developed recommendations address diagnostic accuracy for adult rhinosinusitis, the appropriate use of ancillary tests to confirm diagnosis and guide management (including radiography, nasal endoscopy, computed tomography, and testing for allergy and immune function), and the judicious use of systemic and topical therapy. Emphasis was also placed on identifying multiple chronic conditions that would modify management of rhinosinusitis, including asthma, cystic fibrosis, immunocompromised state, and ciliary dyskinesia. An updated guideline is needed as a result of new clinical trials, new systematic reviews, and the lack of consumer participation in the initial guideline development group.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Bell’s Palsy Executive Summary

The American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO-HNSF) has published a supplement to this issue featuring the new Clinical Practice Guideline: Bell’s Palsy. To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 11 recommendations developed encourage accurate and efficient diagnosis and treatment and, when applicable, facilitate patient follow-up to address the management of long-term sequelae or evaluation of new or worsening symptoms not indicative of Bell’s palsy. There are myriad treatment options for Bell’s palsy; some controversy exists regarding the effectiveness of several of these options, and there are consequent variations in care. In addition, there are numerous diagnostic tests available that are used in the evaluation of patients with Bell’s palsy. Many of these tests are of questionable benefit in Bell’s palsy. Furthermore, while patients with Bell’s palsy enter the health care system with facial paresis/paralysis as a primary complaint, not all patients with facial paresis/paralysis have Bell’s palsy. It is a concern that patients with alternative underlying etiologies may be misdiagnosed or have an unnecessary delay in diagnosis. All of these quality concerns provide an important opportunity for improvement in the diagnosis and management of patients with Bell’s palsy.

Clinical Practice Guideline Acute Otitis Externa Executive Summary

The American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO-HNSF) has published a supplement to this issue featuring the updated Clinical Practice Guideline: Acute Otitis Externa, as a supplement to Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery. To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 8 recommendations developed address appropriate diagnosis of acute otitis externa (AOE) and the use of oral and topical antimicrobials and highlight the need for adequate pain relief. An updated guideline is needed due to new clinical trials, new systematic reviews, and the lack of consumer participation in the initial guideline development group.

A time-motion study of primary care physicians’ work in the electronic health record era

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Electronic health records (EHRs) have had mixed effects on the workflow of ambulatory primary care. In this study, we update previous research on the time required to care for patients in primary care clinics with EHRs. METHODS We directly observed family physician (FP) attendings, residents, and their ambulatory patients in 982 visits in clinics affiliated with 10 residencies of the Residency Research Network of Texas. The FPs were purposely chosen to reflect a diversity of patient care styles. We measured total visit time, previsit chart time, face-to-face time, non-face time, out-of-hours EHR work time, and total EHR work time. RESULTS The mean (SD) visit length was 35.8 (16.6) minutes, not counting resident precepting time. The mean time components included 2.9 (3.8) minutes working in the EHR prior to entering the room, 16.5 (9.2) minutes of face-to-face time not working in the EHR, 2.0 (2.1) minutes working in the EHR in the room (which occurred in 73.4% of the visits), 7.5 (7.5) minutes of non-face time (mostly EHR time), and 6.9 (7.6) minutes of EHR work outside of normal clinic operational hours (which occurred in 64.6% of the visits). The total time and total EHR time varied only slightly between faculty physicians, third-year and second-year residents. Multivariable linear regression analysis revealed many factors associated with total visit time including patient, physician, and clinic infrastructure factors. CONCLUSIONS Primary care physicians spent more time working in the EHR than they spent in face-to-face time with patients in clinic visits.

The full scope of family physicians' work is not reflected by current procedural terminology codes

Background: The purpose of this study was to characterize the content of family physician (FP) clinic encounters, and to count the number of visits in which the FPs addressed issues not explicitly reportable by 99211 to 99215 and 99354 Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes with current reimbursement methods and based on examples provided in the CPT manual. Methods: The data collection instrument was modeled on the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. Trained assistants directly observed every other FP-patient encounter and recorded every patient concern, issue addressed by the physician (including care barriers related to health care systems and social determinants), and treatment ordered in clinics affiliated with 10 residencies of the Residency Research Network of Texas. A visit was deemed to include physician work that was not explicitly reportable if the number or nature of issues addressed exceeded the definitions or examples for 99205/99215 or 99214 + 99354 or a preventive service code, included the physician addressing health care system or social determinant issues, or included the care of a family member. Results: In 982 physician-patient encounters, patients raised 517 different reasons for visit (total, 5278; mean, 5.4 per visit; range, 1 to 16) and the FPs addressed 509 different issues (total issues, 3587; mean, 3.7 per visit; range, 1 to 10). FPs managed 425 different medications, 18 supplements, and 11 devices. A mean of 3.9 chronic medications were continued per visit (range, 0 to 21) and 4.6 total medications were managed (range, 0 to 22). In 592 (60.3%) of the visits the FPs did work that was not explicitly reportable with available CPT codes: 582 (59.3%) addressed more numerous issues than explicitly reportable, 64 (6.5%) addressed system barriers, and 13 (1.3%) addressed concerns for other family members. Conclusions and relevance: FPs perform cognitive work in a majority of their patient encounters that are not explicitly reportable, either by being higher than the CPT example number of diagnoses per code or the type of problems addressed, which has implications for the care of complex multi-morbid patients and the growth of the primary care workforce. To address these limitations, either the CPT codes and their associated rules should be updated to reflect the realities of family physicians’ practices or new billing and coding approaches should be developed.