Systematic review of tonsil surgery quality registers and introduction of the Nordic Tonsil Surgery Register Collaboration

Surgical quality registers provide tools to measure and improve the outcome of surgery. International register collaboration creates an opportunity to assess and critically evaluate national practices, and increases the size of available datasets. Even though millions of yearly tonsillectomies and tonsillotomies are performed worldwide, clinical practices are variable and inconsistency of evidence regarding the best clinical practice exists. The need for quality improvement actions is evident. We aimed to systematically investigate the existing tonsil surgery quality registers found in the literature, and to provide a thorough presentation of the planned Nordic Tonsil Surgery Register Collaboration. A systematic literature search of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases (from January 1990 to December 2016) was conducted to identify registers, databases, quality improvement programs or comprehensive audit programs addressing tonsil surgery. We identified two active registers and three completed audit programs focusing on tonsil surgery quality registration. Recorded variables were fairly similar, but considerable variation in coverage, number of operations included and length of time period for inclusion was discovered. Considering tonsillectomies and tonsillotomies being among the most commonly performed surgical procedures in otorhinolaryngology, it is surprising that only two active registers could be identified. We present a Nordic Tonsil Surgery Register Collaboration-an international tonsil surgery quality register project aiming to provide accurate benchmarks and enhance the quality of tonsil surgery in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden.Peer reviewe

A multi-centre audit of epistaxis management in England:Is there a case for a national review of practice?

AbstractObjective:The ENT-UK Clinical Audit and Practice Advisory Group initiated a pilot audit to investigate variance in epistaxis management between six units nationwide.Method:All patients with a diagnosis of epistaxis who were admitted for in-patient care at six ENT departments between November 2011 and February 2012 were prospectively enrolled.Results:A total of 166 patients were included in the study. Variance was demonstrated between the six units in a number of the key outcome areas. Twenty-eight per cent of patients were identified as eligible for operative intervention for epistaxis in one unit, compared with only 12.5 per cent in another.Conclusion:There are measurable, patient-relevant outcomes to assess epistaxis management and these can highlight areas of potential improvement. This pilot audit gives a snapshot of modern practice, which shows variance between the six units assessed. A national audit may allow us to improve patient experience and maximise efficiency in delivering emergency care in our most common patient encounter.</jats:sec