Historical Vignettes in Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery

1995 ◽  
Vol 112 (5) ◽  
pp. P136-P137
Author(s):  
C. Ron Cannon ◽  
Jerome C. Goldstein

Educational objectives: To use the case histories presented as a teaching tool, which will be particularly useful for demonstrating the scope of our specialty to the nonotolaryngologist, and to provide a better understanding of the history of the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery.

HNO ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 69 (5) ◽  
pp. 338-365
Author(s):  
Albert Mudry ◽  
Robert Mlynski ◽  
Burkhard Kramp

AbstractIn 2021, the German Society of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery is celebrating the 100th anniversary of its foundation. The aim of this article is to present the main inventions and progress made in Germany before 1921, the date the society was founded. Three chronological periods are discernible: the history of otorhinolaryngology (ORL) in Germany until the beginning of the 19th century, focusing mainly on the development of scattered knowledge; the birth of the sub-specialties otology, laryngology (pharyngo-laryngology and endoscopy), and rhinology in the 19th century, combining advances in knowledge and implementation of academic structures; and the creation of the ORL specialty at the turn of the 20th century, mainly concentrating on academic organization and expansion. This period was crucial and allowed for the foundation of the German Society of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery on solid ground. Germany played an important role in the development and progress of ORL internationally in the 19th century with such great contributors as Anton von Tröltsch, Hermann Schwartze, Otto Körner, Rudolf Voltolini, and Gustav Killian to mention a few.


2021 ◽  
pp. 019459982098413
Author(s):  
Cecelia E. Schmalbach ◽  
Jean Brereton ◽  
Cathlin Bowman ◽  
James C. Denneny

Objective (1) To describe the patient and membership cohort captured by the otolaryngology-based specialty-specific Reg-ent registry. (2) To outline the capabilities of the Reg-ent registry, including the process by which members can access evidence-based data to address knowledge gaps identified by the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery/Foundation and ultimately define “quality” for our field of otolaryngology–head and neck surgery. Methods Data analytics was performed on Reg-ent (2015-2020) Results A total of 1629 participants from 239 practices were enrolled in Reg-ent, and 42 health care specialties were represented. Reg-ent encompassed 6,496,477 unique patients and 24,296,713 encounters/visits: the 45- to 64-year age group had the highest representation (n = 1,597,618, 28.1%); 3,867,835 (60.3%) patients identified as Caucasian; and “private” was the most common insurance (33%), followed by Blue Cross/Blue Shield (22%). Allergic rhinitis–unspecified and sensorineural hearing loss–bilateral were the top 2 diagnoses (9% each). Overall, 302 research gaps were identified from 17 clinical practice guidelines. Discussion Reg-ent benefits are vast—from monitoring one’s practice to defining otolaryngology–head and neck surgery quality, participating in advocacy, and conducting research. Reg-ent provides mechanisms for benchmarking, quality assessment, and performance measure development, with the objective of defining and guiding best practice in otolaryngology–head and neck surgery. To be successful, patient diversity must be achieved to include ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Increasing academic medical center membership will assist in achieving diversity so that the quality domain of equitable care is achieved. Implications for Practice Reg-ent provides the first ever registry that is specific to otolaryngology–head and neck surgery and compliant with HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) to collect patient outcomes and define evidence-based quality care.


2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Wierzbicka-Rot ◽  
Artur Gadomski

In February 2019 American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery published clinical practice guidelines which provides evidence-based recommendations that applies to children under consideration for tonsillectomy. This update to the 2011 publication includes large amount of new, practical information about pre-, intra- and postoperative care and management, that can be useful for surgeons as well as GPs and pediatricians


2019 ◽  
Vol 161 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-5
Author(s):  
Andrés M. Bur ◽  
Richard M. Rosenfeld

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs), developed to inform clinicians, patients, and policy makers about what constitutes optimal clinical care, are one way of increasing implementation of evidence into clinical practice. Many factors must be considered by multidisciplinary guideline panels, including strength of available evidence, limitations of current knowledge, risks/benefits of interventions, patient values, and limited resources. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) is a framework for summarizing evidence that has been endorsed by many national and international organizations for developing CPGs. But is GRADE the right choice for CPGs developed by the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO-HNSF)? In this commentary, we will introduce GRADE, discuss its strengths and limitations, and address the question of what potential benefits GRADE might offer beyond existing methodology used by the AAO-HNSF in developing CPGs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document