Dataset Information

Safety practices for in-office laryngology procedures during clinical reintroduction amidst COVID-19.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Describe safety practices for performing in-office laryngology procedures during clinical re-introduction amidst the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Methods

An anonymous survey in Qualtrics was created to evaluate demographics, preprocedure testing, practice settings, anesthesia, and personal protective equipment (PPE) use for five procedure categories (non-mucosal-traversing injections, mucosal-traversing injections, endoscopy without suction, endoscopy with suction/mucosal intervention via working channel, and laser via working channel). The survey was emailed to the Fall Voice Community on Doc Matter and to members of the American Broncho-Esophagological Association (ABEA) from May to June 2020.

Results

Eighty-two respondents were analyzed (response rate: 10%). Respondents represented diverse locations, including international. Most reported academic (71%) or private practices (16%), laryngology fellowship training (76%), and a significant practice devotion to laryngology and broncho-esophagology. During the early re-introduction, most continued to perform all procedure categories. The office was preferred to the OR setting for most, though 36% preferred the OR for laser procedures. There was a preference for preprocedural SARS-Cov2 testing for procedures involving a working channel (>67%), and these procedures had the highest proportion of respondents discontinuing the procedure due to COVID-19. Various types of topical anesthesia were reported, including nebulizer treatments. The most common forms of personal protective equipment utilized were gloves (>95%) and N95 masks (>67%). Powered-air purifying respirators and general surgical masks were used infrequently.

Conclusions

During the early re-introduction, respondents reported generally continuing to perform office laryngology procedures, while greater mucosal manipulation affected decisions to stop procedures due to COVID-19, perform preprocedural SARS-Cov2 testing, and alter topical anesthesia. Gloves and N95 masks were the predominate PPE.

Level of evidence

N/A.

SUBMITTER: Calcagno H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8242633 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: The recent pandemic outbreak has created a huge impact on dentistry. Dental students and dental professionals are at a higher risk because dental practice comprises close communication and widespread exposure to blood, saliva, and other body fluids. It is imperative to evaluate the knowledge and perceptions regarding Coronavirus (COVID-19) among budding dentists. Aim: To assess the knowledge, attitude, and practices of dental students regarding dental practices during COVID-19. Materials and methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire-based study was conducted among undergraduate students in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. An online questionnaire consisting of demographic, knowledge, and attitude-based questions were circulated among the study population, and the responses for the knowledge and attitude were scored. Their mean scores were then calculated. Chi-square test and nonparametric tests were computed using SPSS version 21 software, and p-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: 388 undergraduate dental students have participated in the study from Saudi Arabia. 68% of the respondents believed that they had sufficient knowledge regarding COVID-19. The mean score for knowledge was 5.84 out of 7. Females (6.24) scored statistically significantly higher than males (5.55, p < = 0.001). The mean attitude score was 6.34 out of 9. 93% were using PPE models, while 95% maintained social distancing. Out of all the participating dental students, only 16% were willing to treat patients during the pandemic, and 28% did not want to treat patients, 28% preferred teledentistry. The majority (44%) of dental undergraduates were willing to handle only emergency cases. Conclusion: Accurate knowledge and attitude regarding COVID-19 and diversified opinion on preventive practices during the pandemic period among budding dental professionals evident from Saudi Arabia. Mixed opinions were witnessed among them in seeking help from professional societies. The majority of dental undergraduates were willing to handle only emergency cases.

Project description:Although electronic prescribing (e-prescribing) holds promise for preventing prescription errors in the ambulatory setting, research on its effectiveness is inconclusive.To assess the impact of a stand-alone e-prescribing system on the rates and types of ambulatory prescribing errors.Prospective, non-randomized study using pre-post design of 15 providers who adopted e-prescribing with concurrent controls of 15 paper-based providers from September 2005 through June 2007.Use of a commercial, stand-alone e-prescribing system with clinical decision support including dosing recommendations and checks for drug-allergy interactions, drug-drug interactions, and duplicate therapies.Prescribing errors were identified by a standardized prescription and chart review.We analyzed 3684 paper-based prescriptions at baseline and 3848 paper-based and electronic prescriptions at one year of follow-up. For e-prescribing adopters, error rates decreased nearly sevenfold, from 42.5 per 100 prescriptions (95% confidence interval (CI), 36.7-49.3) at baseline to 6.6 per 100 prescriptions (95% CI, 5.1-8.3) one year after adoption (p < 0.001). For non-adopters, error rates remained high at 37.3 per 100 prescriptions (95% CI, 27.6-50.2) at baseline and 38.4 per 100 prescriptions (95% CI, 27.4-53.9) at one year (p = 0.54). At one year, the error rate for e-prescribing adopters was significantly lower than for non-adopters (p < 0.001). Illegibility errors were very high at baseline and were completely eliminated by e-prescribing (87.6 per 100 prescriptions at baseline for e-prescribing adopters, 0 at one year).Prescribing errors may occur much more frequently in community-based practices than previously reported. Our preliminary findings suggest that stand-alone e-prescribing with clinical decision support may significantly improve ambulatory medication safety.ClinicalTrials.gov, Taconic Health Information Network and Community (THINC), NCT00225563, http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00225563?term=Kaushal&rank=6 .