COVID-19 and ENT SLT services, workforce and research in the UK: A discussion paper

Background. The COVID‐19 pandemic and the UK government's subsequent coronavirus action plan have fundamentally impacted on every aspect of healthcare. One area that is severely affected is ear, nose and throat (ENT)/laryngology where speech and language therapists (SLTs) engage in a diverse range of practice with patients with a range of conditions, including voice disorders, airway problems, and head and neck cancers (HNCs). A large majority of these patients are in high‐risk categories, and many specialized clinical practices are vulnerable. In addition, workforce and research issues are challenged in both the immediate context and the future. Aims. To discuss the threats and opportunities from the COVID‐19 pandemic for SLTs in ENT/laryngology with specific reference to clinical practice, workforce and research leadership. Methods & Procedures. The relevant sections of the World Health Organisation's (WHO) health systems building blocks framework (2007) were used to structure the study. Expert agreement was determined by an iterative process of multiple‐group discussions, the use of all recent relevant policy documentation, and other literature and shared documentation/writing. The final paper was verified and agreed by all authors. Main Contribution. The main threats to ENT/laryngology SLT clinical services include increased patient complexity related to COVID‐19 voice and airway problems, delayed HNC diagnosis, reduced access to instrumental procedures and inequitable care provision. The main clinical opportunities include the potential for new modes of service delivery and collaborations, and harnessing SLT expertise in non‐instrumental assessment. There are several workforce issues, including redeployment (and impact on current services), training implications and psychological impact on staff. Workforce opportunities exist for service innovation and potential extended ENT/SLT practice roles. Research is threatened by a reduction in immediate funding calls and high competition. Current research is affected by very limited access to participants and the ability to conduct face‐to‐face and instrumental assessments. However, research opportunities may result in greater collaboration, and changes in service delivery necessitate robust investigation and evaluation. A new national set of research priorities is likely to emerge. Conclusions & Implications. The immediate impact of the pandemic has resulted in major disruption to all aspects of clinical delivery, workforce and research for ENT/laryngology SLT. It is unclear when any of these areas will resume operations and whether permanent changes to clinical practice, professional remits and research priorities will follow. However, significant opportunity exists in the post‐COVID era to re‐evaluate current practice, embrace opportunities and evaluate new ways of working

Shielding, hospital admission and mortality among 1216 people with total laryngectomy in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional survey from the first national lockdown

BackgroundPeople with a total laryngectomy (PTL) rely on a permanent opening in their neck (stoma) to breathe. This altered anatomy may increase susceptibility to contracting and transmitting SARS-CoV-2.AimsTo report on (1) the frequency and characteristics of PTL who tested positive for COVID-19, (2) the receipt of advice regarding shielding and patient self-reports of shielding, (3) hospital admissions and length of stay, and (4) mortality rates in this group during the first UK national lockdown.Methods & proceduresThis is a cross-sectional survey and case note review. National Health Service (NHS) centres providing care to PTL were invited to participate via the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists' (RCSLT) Head & Neck Clinical Excellence Networks and through social media. PTL were reviewed by their speech and language therapist either in person or via telehealth between 30 March and 30 September 2020. Data were collected within the time frame covered by the Control of Patient Information (COPI) notice issued for COVID-19 and included information on COVID-19 testing, shielding, hospital admissions, length of stay and deaths. Information was submitted to the lead NHS site using a custom designed data-capture worksheet. Analysis was performed using descriptive statistics, including proportions and frequency counts. Pearson's Chi squared tests were used to compare categorical data using a 5% significance level.Outcomes & resultsData were obtained from 1216 PTL from 26 centres across the UK. A total of 81% were male; mean age was 70 years (28-97 years). Of the total group, 12% received a COVID-19 test. A total of 24 (2% of total sample) tested positive for COVID-19. Almost one-third of PTL (32%) received a government letter or were advised to shield by a healthcare professional. During the data collection time frame, 12% had a hospital admission (n = 151) with a median length of stay of 1 day (1-133 days), interquartile range (IQR) = 17 days. A total of 20 of these admissions (13%) had tested positive for COVID-19 with a median length of stay of 26 days, IQR = 49 days. The overall mortality was 4% (41 patients), with eight deaths occurring within 28 days of testing positive for COVID-19.Conclusions & implicationsThis study highlighted the lack of routine national data for neck-breathers with which to compare the current findings. Greater testing in the community is necessary to understand the prevalence of COVID-19 in PTL and if this group is indeed more susceptible. The potential for nasopharyngeal and tracheal aspirates to show differing results when testing for COVID-19 in neck-breathers requires further investigation.What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subject? People with total laryngectomy (PTL) have an altered anatomy for breathing and speaking. The presence of a neck stoma poses an additional virus entry point aside from the nose, mouth and conjunctiva. This could increase the susceptibility to COVID-19 for PTL. What this paper adds? This is the first national audit to provide data on shielding, hospital admissions and mortality for patients with total laryngectomy in the UK over the pandemic. The overall mortality in PTL over the first lockdown did not appear to be higher than the "best case" estimates from previous years. However, one in three PTL who acquired COVID-19 and were admitted to hospital, died within 28 days of testing positive. These findings are relevant to the current care and management of PTL over the pandemic but also highlights important knowledge gaps. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? This study highlights gaps in the collection of baseline information on hospital admissions, length of stay and mortality for people with laryngectomy in the UK, restricting comparisons between the current data and historical data. The need for further research on whether neck-breathers should be tested via both nasopharyngeal and tracheal aspirates is important not just currently, but also in case of any future respiratory epidemics

COVID-19 and ENT SLT/laryngology services, workforce and research in the UK: A discussion paper

Background. The COVID‐19 pandemic and the UK government's subsequent coronavirus action plan have fundamentally impacted on every aspect of healthcare. One area that is severely affected is ear, nose and throat (ENT)/laryngology where speech and language therapists (SLTs) engage in a diverse range of practice with patients with a range of conditions, including voice disorders, airway problems, and head and neck cancers (HNCs). A large majority of these patients are in high‐risk categories, and many specialized clinical practices are vulnerable. In addition, workforce and research issues are challenged in both the immediate context and the future. Aims. To discuss the threats and opportunities from the COVID‐19 pandemic for SLTs in ENT/laryngology with specific reference to clinical practice, workforce and research leadership. Methods & Procedures. The relevant sections of the World Health Organisation's (WHO) health systems building blocks framework (2007) were used to structure the study. Expert agreement was determined by an iterative process of multiple‐group discussions, the use of all recent relevant policy documentation, and other literature and shared documentation/writing. The final paper was verified and agreed by all authors. Main Contribution. The main threats to ENT/laryngology SLT clinical services include increased patient complexity related to COVID‐19 voice and airway problems, delayed HNC diagnosis, reduced access to instrumental procedures and inequitable care provision. The main clinical opportunities include the potential for new modes of service delivery and collaborations, and harnessing SLT expertise in non‐instrumental assessment. There are several workforce issues, including redeployment (and impact on current services), training implications and psychological impact on staff. Workforce opportunities exist for service innovation and potential extended ENT/SLT practice roles. Research is threatened by a reduction in immediate funding calls and high competition. Current research is affected by very limited access to participants and the ability to conduct face‐to‐face and instrumental assessments. However, research opportunities may result in greater collaboration, and changes in service delivery necessitate robust investigation and evaluation. A new national set of research priorities is likely to emerge. Conclusions & Implications. The immediate impact of the pandemic has resulted in major disruption to all aspects of clinical delivery, workforce and research for ENT/laryngology SLT. It is unclear when any of these areas will resume operations and whether permanent changes to clinical practice, professional remits and research priorities will follow. However, significant opportunity exists in the post‐COVID era to re‐evaluate current practice, embrace opportunities and evaluate new ways of working

Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

Background: Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients. Methods: We did a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial of patients aged 40 years or older undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Eligible UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (those that had an emergency general surgical service, a substantial volume of emergency abdominal surgery cases, and contributed data to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, over an 85-week period with one geographical cluster commencing the intervention every 5 weeks from the second to the 16th time period. Patients were masked to the study group, but it was not possible to mask hospital staff or investigators. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80682973. Findings: Treatment took place between March 3, 2014, and Oct 19, 2015. 22 754 patients were assessed for elegibility. Of 15 873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. Eight patients in the usual care group and nine patients in the QI group were not included in the analysis because of missing primary outcome data. The primary outcome of 90-day mortality occurred in 1210 (16%) patients in the QI group compared with 1393 (16%) patients in the usual care group (HR 1·11, 0·96–1·28). Interpretation: No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Future QI programmes should ensure that teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme

Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial

BACKGROUND: Emergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients. METHODS: We did a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial of patients aged 40 years or older undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Eligible UK National Health Service (NHS) hospitals (those that had an emergency general surgical service, a substantial volume of emergency abdominal surgery cases, and contributed data to the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit) were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in a random order, based on a computer-generated random sequence, over an 85-week period with one geographical cluster commencing the intervention every 5 weeks from the second to the 16th time period. Patients were masked to the study group, but it was not possible to mask hospital staff or investigators. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN80682973. FINDINGS: Treatment took place between March 3, 2014, and Oct 19, 2015. 22 754 patients were assessed for elegibility. Of 15 873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. Eight patients in the usual care group and nine patients in the QI group were not included in the analysis because of missing primary outcome data. The primary outcome of 90-day mortality occurred in 1210 (16%) patients in the QI group compared with 1393 (16%) patients in the usual care group (HR 1·11, 0·96-1·28). INTERPRETATION: No survival benefit was observed from this QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. Future QI programmes should ensure that teams have both the time and resources needed to improve patient care. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research Programme

Contemporary management of voice and swallowing disorders in patients with advanced lung cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Advanced lung cancer can cause changes to swallowing and communication function. Direct tumour invasion, dyspnoea and deconditioning can all impact on swallowing function and communication. Cancer treatment, if administered, may cause or compound symptoms. In this study, the nature of swallowing and communication difficulties in patients with advanced lung cancer will be discussed, and management options including medical management, speech and language therapy (SLT) intervention, and surgical interventions will be considered. RECENT FINDINGS: Advanced lung cancer can result in voice and swallowing difficulties, which can increase symptom burden and significantly impact on quality of life (QOL). There is a growing evidence base to support the use of injection laryngoplasty under local anaesthetic to offer immediate improvement in voice, swallowing and overall QOL. SUMMARY: There is limited literature on the nature and extent of voice and swallowing impairment in patients with lung cancer. Well designed studies with robust and sensitive multidimensional dysphagia and dysphonia assessments are required. Outcome studies examining interventions with clearly defined treatment goals are required. These studies should include both functional and patient-reported outcome measures to develop the evidence base and to ensure that interventions are both timely and appropriate

Biochemical testing for inborn errors of metabolism: experience from a large tertiary neonatal centre

Inborn errors of metabolism are an individually rare but collectively significant cause of mortality and morbidity in the neonatal period. They are identified by either newborn screening programmes or clinician-initiated targeted biochemical screening. This study examines the relative contribution of these two methods to the identification of inborn errors of metabolism and describes the incidence of these conditions in a large, tertiary, neonatal unit. We also examined which factors could impact the reliability of metabolic testing in this cohort. This is a retrospective, single-site study examining infants in whom a targeted metabolic investigation was performed from January 2018 to December 2020 inclusive. Data was also provided by the national newborn screening laboratory regarding newborn screening diagnoses. Two hundred and four newborns received a clinician-initiated metabolic screen during the time period examined with 5 newborns being diagnosed with an inborn error of metabolism (IEM) (2.4%). Of the 25,240 infants born in the hospital during the period examined, a further 11 newborns had an inborn error of metabolism diagnosed on newborn screening. This produced an incidence in our unit over the time described of 6.34 per 10,000 births. This number reflects a minimum estimate, given that the conditions diagnosed refer to early-onset disorders and distinctive categories of IEM only. Efficiency of the clinician-initiated metabolic screening process was also examined. The only statistically significant variable in requiring repeat metabolic screening was early day of life (z-score = − 2.58, p = 0.0098). A total of 28.4% was missing one of three key metabolic investigation parameters of blood glucose, ammonia or lactate concentration with ammonia the most common investigation missing. While hypoglycemia was the most common clinical rationale for a clinician-initiated metabolic test, it was a poor predictor of inborn error of metabolism with no newborns of 25 screened were diagnosed with a metabolic disorder. Conclusion: Clinician-targeted metabolic screening had a high diagnostic yield given the relatively low prevalence of inborn errors of metabolism in the general population. Thoughts should be given to the rationale behind each targeted metabolic test and what specific metabolic disease or category of inborn error of metabolism they are concerned along with commencing targeted testing. What is Known: • Inborn errors of metabolism are a rare but potentially treatable cause of newborn mortality and morbidity. • A previous study conducted in a tertiary unit in an area with limited newborn screening demonstrated a diagnostic yield of 5.4%. What is New: • Clinician-initiated targeted metabolic screening has a good diagnostic performance even with a more expanded newborn screening programme. • Further optimisation could be achieved by examining the best timing and also the rationale of metabolic testing in the newborn period.</p

Patient advocacy in head and neck cancer: realities, challenges and the role of the multi-disciplinary team.

This paper explores the concept of advocacy in head and neck cancer. We define inherent challenges in the development and success of advocacy within this context, and offer ways to embed it within clinical practice. We outline what advocacy is, ways in which it may benefit people with head and neck cancer and the engagement required from health care professionals to facilitate advocacy to improve outcomes