Display options
Cite
DeVore EK, Gray ST, Huston MN, et al. Decision aid and preference assessment of topical anesthesia for otolaryngology procedures. Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2021;6(4):794-799doi: 10.1002/lio2.604.
DeVore, E. K., Gray, S. T., Huston, M. N., Song, P. C., Alkire, B. C., & Naunheim, M. R. (2021). Decision aid and preference assessment of topical anesthesia for otolaryngology procedures. Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 6(4), 794-799. https://doi.org/10.1002/lio2.604
DeVore, Elliana K, et al. "Decision aid and preference assessment of topical anesthesia for otolaryngology procedures." Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology vol. 6,4 (2021): 794-799. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/lio2.604
DeVore EK, Gray ST, Huston MN, Song PC, Alkire BC, Naunheim MR. Decision aid and preference assessment of topical anesthesia for otolaryngology procedures. Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2021 Jun 25;6(4):794-799. doi: 10.1002/lio2.604. eCollection 2021 Aug. PMID: 34401504; PMCID: PMC8356857.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2021 Jun 25;6(4):794-799. doi: 10.1002/lio2.604. eCollection 2021 Aug.

Decision aid and preference assessment of topical anesthesia for otolaryngology procedures.

Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology

Elliana K DeVore, Stacey T Gray, Molly N Huston, Phillip C Song, Blake C Alkire, Matthew R Naunheim

Affiliations

  1. Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary Boston Massachusetts USA.
  2. Department of Otolaryngology, Washington University in St. Louis St. Louis Missouri USA.

PMID: 34401504 PMCID: PMC8356857 DOI: 10.1002/lio2.604

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine preference patterns for topical anesthesia in patients undergoing endoscopy pre-coronavirus (2019 coronavirus disease [COVID-19]) pandemic and analyze outcomes based on preference, using a decision aid format.

METHODS: A decision aid was developed with expert and patient input. New patients presenting to subspecialty clinics over a 2-month pre-COVID-19 period completed a pre-procedure survey about their priorities, then were asked to choose between topical oxymetazoline/lidocaine spray or none. A post-procedure outcome survey followed.

RESULTS: Of 151 patients, 90.1% patients elected to have topical anesthesia. Top patient priorities were "I want the scope to be easy for the doctor" and "I want to be as comfortable as possible." Patients who strongly wanted to avoid medication (

CONCLUSIONS: Patient preferences are easily elicited and correlate with treatment choices. Most patients chose to have topical anesthetic and were willing to tolerate side effects; however, both patients with and without topical anesthetic were satisfied with their choices. This decision aid can be used to optimize shared decision making in the otolaryngology clinic. Given the aerosolizing potential of both spray and no spray conditions, this insight may be consequential when devising office protocols for post-COVID-19 practice.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

© 2021 The Authors. Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The Triological Society.

Keywords: COVID‐19; SARS‐CoV‐2; anesthetics; coronavirus; decision making; local; patient preference; shared; surveys and questionnaires

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Laryngoscope. 2018 Apr;128(4):1007-1015 - PubMed
  2. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2020 Jul;10(7):798-805 - PubMed
  3. Int J Clin Pract. 2005 Feb;59(2):130-3 - PubMed
  4. BMJ. 2006 Aug 26;333(7565):417 - PubMed
  5. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014 Apr;150(4):582-6 - PubMed
  6. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008 Apr;37(2):240-9 - PubMed
  7. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2015 Oct 2;112(40):665-71 - PubMed
  8. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020 May 11;49(1):29 - PubMed
  9. Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol. 2020 Feb 21;16:15 - PubMed
  10. Health Aff (Millwood). 2012 Sep;31(9):2094-104 - PubMed
  11. PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e35797 - PubMed
  12. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1998 Jun;23(3):259-62 - PubMed
  13. Clin Otolaryngol. 2016 Oct;41(5):546-63 - PubMed
  14. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2013 Jun;11(3):163-80 - PubMed
  15. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1997 Dec;40(6):1352-7 - PubMed
  16. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 2002 Jun;27(3):192-6 - PubMed
  17. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13 Suppl 2:S1 - PubMed
  18. Laryngoscope. 2019 Nov;129(11):2646-2651 - PubMed
  19. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016 Nov 4;45(1):57 - PubMed
  20. Health Aff (Millwood). 2007 May-Jun;26(3):726-30 - PubMed
  21. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017 Oct 1;143(10):971-972 - PubMed
  22. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 2002 Dec;27(6):485-8 - PubMed
  23. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018 Apr;158(4):586-593 - PubMed
  24. J Laryngol Otol. 1997 Jul;111(7):616-8 - PubMed
  25. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018 Jul;159(1):11-16 - PubMed
  26. Med Care. 1995 Aug;33(8):765-70 - PubMed
  27. Neurosurgery. 2020 Jul 1;87(1):E66-E67 - PubMed
  28. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020 Sep;163(3):465-470 - PubMed
  29. Otolaryngol Clin North Am. 2019 Feb;52(1):23-33 - PubMed
  30. Med Decis Making. 2015 Jan;35(1):114-31 - PubMed
  31. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Sep 15;(9):CD006732 - PubMed
  32. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Mar 16;(3):CD005606 - PubMed
  33. N Engl J Med. 2020 Mar 19;382(12):1177-1179 - PubMed
  34. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2015 Feb;272(2):263-70 - PubMed
  35. J Laryngol Otol. 1996 Jun;110(6):540-2 - PubMed
  36. Clin Otolaryngol. 2011 Dec;36(6):550-7 - PubMed
  37. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 2001 Feb;26(1):25-8 - PubMed
  38. BMJ. 2009 May 28;338:b2159 - PubMed
  39. Neurosurgery. 2020 Aug 1;87(2):E140-E146 - PubMed
  40. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020 Oct;163(4):702-704 - PubMed
  41. Health Expect. 2010 Sep;13(3):258-72 - PubMed
  42. Clin Otolaryngol. 2020 Jan;45(1):32-39 - PubMed
  43. Methods Mol Biol. 2015;1282:1-23 - PubMed
  44. BMJ. 2012 Nov 08;345:e6572 - PubMed
  45. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Apr 12;4:CD001431 - PubMed

Publication Types