Leaderboard Ad

Role of Patient Safety, Quality Improvement Examined

Scientific Oral Presentations: Patient Safety and Quality Improvement
8:45 – 9:45 am
Room N227A

Researchers will expand on a variety of subjects Wednesday during “Scientific Oral Presentations: Patient Safety and Quality Improvement.” Following are summaries of four of the 10 five-minute presentations.

Safety of Drilling 3D Printed Temporal Bones

The use of temporal bones created using 3D printers is becoming more common, but there are concerns about the safety of drilling into the bones. A study collected air samples during high-speed drilling on models made from polylactic acid and photoreactive acrylic resin.

Samples were tested for airborne concentrations of volatile organic compounds and from a vapor badge worn at the neckline by the surgeon. All of the samples fell below applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration Action Levels and permissible exposure limits for all contaminants sampled.

“The take-home itself may be a relief more than a surprise, but I hope that this project brings about discussion on ensuring the safe adoption of new technologies,” said presenter Monika E. Freiser, MD, MPH. “As with any intervention, monitoring the impact, both favorable and unfavorable, is essential.”

QI in Otolaryngology Residency: Survey of Residents

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education has made systems-based practice and practice-based learning and improvement a priority, but little is known about the status of quality improvement (QI) education during otolaryngology training. The results of a survey of residents about QI were reviewed in a recent study.

The study found that in 123 responses from residents, 87 percent consider QI education important, but only 44 percent followed a formal QI education curriculum. Barriers to implementation were a lack of faculty enthusiasm, lack of resident buy-in, and competing educational demands, according to responses.

“This survey highlights a distinct lack of resources in support of these educational goals, the need to generate comprehensive QI programs, and support and assessment of resident QI projects,” said presenter Charlotte K. Hughes, MD, MPH.

Predatory Journals in Medical Publishing

A predatory journal is defined as one that charges publication fees to authors but does not use the peer reviews and editorial practices of legitimate journals. “Predatory publishers are flourishing because the business is lucrative and easy money, but lack scientific rigor,” according to an abstract by presenter Brian W. Blakley, MD, PhD.

There is variability in criteria regarding which journals are “predatory,” Dr. Blakley concluded. Ownership and control of content are of major importance in determining a predatory journal.

“Predatory journalism is big problem that will undermine legitimate scientific discovery,” Dr. Blakley said. “We can correct the problem if we care.”

Usefulness of Otolaryngology After-Visit Summaries

Patients reported that after-visit summaries are easy to understand and helpful, but the usefulness of the summaries was lower among patients who had a lower health literacy.

The results of an electronic survey of 522 patients found that 58.6 percent of patients say after-visit summaries are easy to understand while 39.9 percent found them helpful. The respondents were predominantly female (67.4 percent) and white (77.4 percent).

“We were not surprised to find in the summaries that many patients who self-reported lower levels of health literacy were more likely to report having difficulty with understanding the instructions,” said presenter Matthew G. Crowson, MD. “Future refinements to the AVS should take patients’ health literacy into account to ensure clinical instructions are helpful, and understandable.”

Return to AAO-HNSF Daily articles