Perioperative Teaching and Feedback: How are we doing in Canadian OTL-HNS programs?

Background: Discrepancies between resident and faculty perceptions regarding optimal teaching and feedback during surgery are well known but these differences have not yet been described in Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery (OTL-HNS). The objectives were thus to compare faculty and resident perceptions of perioperative teaching and feedback in OTL-HNS residency programs across Canada with the aim of highlighting potential areas for improvement. Methods: An anonymous electronic questionnaire was distributed to residents and teaching faculty in OTL-HNS across Canada with additional paper copies distributed at four institutions. Surveys consisted of ratings on a 5-point Likert scale and open-ended questions. Responses among groups were analysed with the Wilcoxon-Mann Whitney test, while thematic analysis was used for the open-ended questions. Results: A total of 143 teaching faculty and residents responded with statistically significant differences on 11 out of 25 variables. Namely, faculty reported higher rates of pre and intra-operative teaching compared to resident reports. Faculty also felt they gave adequate feedback on residents\u27 strengths and technical skills contrary to what the residents thought. Both groups did agree however that pre-operative discussion is not consistently done, nor is feedback consistently given or sought. Conclusion: Faculty and residents in OTL-HNS residency programs disagree on the frequency and optimal timing of peri-operative teaching and feedback. This difference in perception emphasizes the need for a more structured approach to feedback delivery including explicitly stating when feedback is being given, and the overall need for better communication between residents and staff

The role of atopy in otitis media with effusion among primary school children: audiological investigation

Objective of this study is to value the role of atopy in otitis media with effusion (OME) in children attending primary school in Western Sicily focusing on the audiological characteristics among atopic and non atopic subjects suffering from OME. 310 children (5-6 years old) were screened by skin tests and divided into atopics (G1) and non atopics (G2). The samples were evaluated for OME by pneumatic otoscopy, tympanogram and acoustic reflex tests. The parameters considered were: documented persistent middle ear effusion by otoscopic examination for a minimum of 3 months; presence of B or C tympanogram; absence of ipsilateral acoustic reflex and a conductive hearing loss greater than 25 dB at any one of the frequencies from 250 Hz through 4 kHz. 56 children (18.06%) resulted atopics while 254 were non atopics. OME was identified in 24 atopic children and in 16 non atopic children for a total number of 40 children; the overall prevalence rate was 12.9% (42.85% for G1 and 6.30% for G2). OME was bilateral in 28 children (70%), with a significative difference between G1 (79.17%) and G2 (56.25%). The prevalence of B tympanogram was 70.59%, corresponding to 79.07% for G1 and 56% for G2. The mean air conduction pure tone was respectively 31.97 dB for G1 and 29.8 dB for G2. The prevalence value of OME in atopics children, also supported by the higher predominance of bilaterality, B tympanogram and hearing loss among this group, could suggest the important role of allergy in the pathogenesis of OME

Perioperative Teaching and Feedback: How are we doing in Canadian OTL-HNS programs?

Abstract Background Discrepancies between resident and faculty perceptions regarding optimal teaching and feedback during surgery are well known but these differences have not yet been described in Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery (OTL-HNS). The objectives were thus to compare faculty and resident perceptions of perioperative teaching and feedback in OTL-HNS residency programs across Canada with the aim of highlighting potential areas for improvement. Methods An anonymous electronic questionnaire was distributed to residents and teaching faculty in OTL-HNS across Canada with additional paper copies distributed at four institutions. Surveys consisted of ratings on a 5-point Likert scale and open-ended questions. Responses among groups were analysed with the Wilcoxon-Mann Whitney test, while thematic analysis was used for the open-ended questions. Results A total of 143 teaching faculty and residents responded with statistically significant differences on 11 out of 25 variables. Namely, faculty reported higher rates of pre and intra-operative teaching compared to resident reports. Faculty also felt they gave adequate feedback on residents’ strengths and technical skills contrary to what the residents thought. Both groups did agree however that pre-operative discussion is not consistently done, nor is feedback consistently given or sought. Conclusion Faculty and residents in OTL-HNS residency programs disagree on the frequency and optimal timing of peri-operative teaching and feedback. This difference in perception emphasizes the need for a more structured approach to feedback delivery including explicitly stating when feedback is being given, and the overall need for better communication between residents and staff

Factors Affecting the Use of Medical Articles for Citation and Academic Reference

Ian Wiens,1 Angela Ramjiawan,2 Julia Wiens,1 Kevin Fung,3 Malcolm Gooi,4 Patrick Gooi,4 Amanda Hu,5 Darren Leitao,1 Lily HP Nguyen,6,7 Adrian Gooi1,5 1Max Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada; 2Office of Clinical Research, St. Boniface Hospital, Winnipeg, Canada; 3Department of Otolaryngology, Western University, London, Canada; 4Department of Ophthalmology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada; 5Department of Otolaryngology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada; 6Department of Otolaryngology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada; 7Institute of Health Sciences Education – McGill University, Montreal, CanadaCorrespondence: Adrian Gooi, Department of Otolaryngology, University of British Columbia, VGH - Gordon & Leslie Diamond Health Care Centre, 2775 Laurel Street (4th Floor - Rm. 4297), Vancouver, BC, V5Z 1M9, Canada, Tel +1 778-789-4437, Email [email protected]: Increases in publication quantity and the onset of open access have increased the complexity of conducting a literature search. Bibliometric markers, like impact factor (IF), have traditionally been used to help identify high-quality research. These markers exist amongst a variety of other factors, which poses the following question: what factors are examined when considering articles for clinical and academic research?Objective: To determine what factors are involved when authors choose citations to include in their publications.Methods: A voluntary and anonymous questionnaire-based survey was distributed to medical students, residents, and faculty from multiple medical schools across Canada during the 2020/2021 academic year. Survey ratings were scored on a 5-point Likert scale and open word response.Results: The study collected 156 complete sets of responses including 78 trainees (61 medical students and 17 residents), and 78 faculty. Language of the article (3.93) and availability on PubMed/Medline (3.77) were found more important than country of origin (2.14), institution (2.26), and IF (2.97). Trainees found the following factors more important than faculty: year of publication (3.94 vs 3.47, p = 0.0016), availability on Google/Google Scholar (2.51 vs 1.88, p = 0.0013), Open-access (2.46 vs 1.87, p = 0.0011), and Free access (2.73 vs 2.31, p = 0.049).Conclusion: Our study identified differences in faculty and trainee literature search preferences, bias towards English language publications, and the movement towards online literature sources. This knowledge provides insight into what biases individuals may be exposed to based on their language and literature search preferences. Future areas of research include how trainees’ opinions change over time, identifying trainee ability to recognize predatory journals, and the need for better online journal article translators to mitigate the language bias. We believe this will lead to higher quality evidence and optimal patient care amongst healthcare workers.Keywords: research methodology, medical education, research priorities, evidence based medicin

How firms manage their cash flows: an examination of diversification’s effect

We extend recently documented evidence that diversified firms hold significantly less cash than specialized firms to consider differences in how diversified and specialized firms adjust their cash flows to achieve their target cash balance. We find that diversified firms have higher free cash flows as a result of equal operating cash flows and lower investment in comparison to specialized firms. Diversified firms save less cash by placing less reliance on external financing; by issuing less debt and equity, and distributing higher cash dividends. Our findings support the hypothesis that diversified firms are able to hold less precautionary cash as they are in better position to finance investment opportunities internally from operating cash flows