No abstract

Background The numbers of Rhinology/Skull Base Surgery fellowship programs and applicants have been increasing in recent years. However, little information is currently available with regards to the most important aspects of the application process. Objective The goal of this study was to determine the factors that Rhinology/Skull Base Surgery fellowship directors consider most important when selecting a fellow. Methods An anonymous, online survey was distributed to current Rhinology/Skull Base Surgery fellowship directors. 28 of 31 fellowship directors (90%) completed the survey. Respondents were asked to provide basic information regarding the program and to rank various selection factors they deem most important. Results For assessing the quality of an application, fellowship directors placed the highest value on LORs. Research experience and publications were also important considerations. The traditional strength of an applicant’s residency program was a factor, while medical school performance, USMLE scores, and OTE score did not play a significant role in the selection process. For subjective assessment of applicants, the most value was placed on faculty assessment of the applicant during their interview. Attention was also given to personality fit with the program and the perceived maturity and initiative of the applicant. Conclusion Numerous academic achievements and personal characteristics are given consideration in the Rhinology/Skull Base Surgery fellowship selection process, but recommendation from a trusted colleague and performance on interviews were viewed to be the most critical factors for fellowship programs in selecting applicants. This is consistent with studies that have explored the selection process for other otolaryngology fellowship programs.

Objective: To perform an evidence-based systematic review evaluating perioperative analgesia, including opioid alternatives, used for patients undergoing thyroidectomy and parathyroidectomy. Methods: A comprehensive literature search from 1997 to January 2018 of Pubmed, Cochrane, and EmBase libraries was performed for studies reporting analgesic administration following thyroid or parathyroid surgery. This systematic review was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were evaluated for level of evidence and given a Jadad score to assess for risk of bias. Outcomes gathered included postoperative pain scores, time to rescue analgesia, rescue analgesic consumption, and adverse events. Results: Thirty-eight randomized controlled trials met inclusion criteria. The GRADE criteria determined the overall evidence to be moderate-high. Studies utilizing NSAIDs reported reduced requirements for rescue analgesics. Acetaminophen studies presented with conflicting data on effectiveness. Gabapentinoid studies demonstrated lower pain scores and an increased time to rescue analgesic. Local anesthetics were effective at decreasing Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain scores while also reducing rescue analgesic consumption. Ketamine was shown to increased postoperative nausea and vomiting. NSAIDs and local anesthetic studies had an aggregate grade of evidence A, while all others had grade B evidence. Conclusion: There is significant evidence supporting the use of NSAIDs and local anesthetics in the perioperative period for pain management for thyroid and parathyroid surgeries. Acetaminophen, gabapentinoid and ketamine have some supporting evidence and may serve as adequate alternatives. Further multi-institutional RCTs are warranted to delineate optimal analgesic regimens. Level of Evidence: NA

No abstract

No abstract