3 research outputs found

    Academic Benchmarks for Otolaryngology Leaders

    No full text
    This study aimed to characterize current benchmarks for academic otolaryngologists serving in positions of leadership and identify factors potentially associated with promotion to these positions. Information regarding chairs (or division chiefs), vice chairs, and residency program directors was obtained from faculty listings and organized by degree(s) obtained, academic rank, fellowship training status, sex, and experience. Research productivity was characterized by (a) successful procurement of active grants from the National Institutes of Health and prior grants from the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation Centralized Otolaryngology Research Efforts program and (b) scholarly impact, as measured by the h-index. Chairs had the greatest amount of experience (32.4 years) and were the least likely to have multiple degrees, with 75.8% having an MD degree only. Program directors were the most likely to be fellowship trained (84.8%). Women represented 16% of program directors, 3% of chairs, and no vice chairs. Chairs had the highest scholarly impact (as measured by the h-index) and the greatest external grant funding. This analysis characterizes the current picture of leadership in academic otolaryngology. Chairs, when compared to their vice chair and program director counterparts, had more experience and greater research impact. Women were poorly represented among all academic leadership positions

    Image-guidance in endoscopic sinus surgery: is it associated with decreased medicolegal liability?

    No full text
    BackgroundThe use of image-guidance (IG) in endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) has escalated over the last decade despite a lack of consensus that its use improves outcomes or decreases complications. One theoretical reason for using IG in ESS is its potential to minimize legal liability should an adverse outcome occur. In this study, we aimed to characterize the role of IG in ESS litigation, and further detail other factors in pertinent cases. A secondary objective was to characterize recent malpractice litigation for other relevant factors. MethodsRelevant cases from Westlaw were examined to determine whether the use of IG played a role in initiating litigation in ESS malpractice suits. Factors such as patient demographics and alleged cause(s) of malpractice litigation were examined. ResultsOut of 30 malpractice cases from 2004 to April 2013, 4 (13.3%) mentioned the use of IG during ESS, although this did not appear to be a factor affecting the plaintiff's decision to initiate litigation, nor the case outcomes. In the 26 cases (86.7%) in which IG was not used, its non-use was not specified as an alleged cause of negligence. Eleven (36.7%) cases were resolved in the defendant's favor. Frequently-cited factors included iatrogenic injury (83.3%), permanent deficits (66.7%), needing additional surgery (63.3%), orbital and intracranial injury, and perceived deficits in informed consent (40.0%). ConclusionThe use of IG was not found to be a factor in ESS litigation. This suggests that not using IG does not necessarily make one more vulnerable to malpractice litigation
    corecore