Appropriateness for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for otolaryngologist and head and neck surgeons in case of pregnancy, breastfeeding, or childbearing potential: Yo-IFOS and CEORL-HNS joint clinical consensus statement

Purpose SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are a key step in fighting the pandemic. Nevertheless, their rapid development did not allow for testing among specific population subgroups such as pregnant and breastfeeding women, or elaborating specific guidelines for healthcare personnel working in high infection risk specialties, such as otolaryngology (ORL). This clinical consensus statement (CCS) aims to offer guidance for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination to this high-risk population based on the best evidence available. Methods A multidisciplinary international panel of 33 specialists judged statements through a two-round modified Delphi method survey. Statements were designed to encompass the following topics: risk of SARS-Cov-2 infection and use of protective equipment in ORL; SARS-Cov-2 infection and vaccines and respective risks for the mother/child dyad; and counseling for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnant, breastfeeding, or fertile healthcare workers (PBFHW). All ORL PBFHW were considered as the target audience. Results Of the 13 statements, 7 reached consensus or strong consensus, 2 reached no consensus, and 2 reached near-consensus. According to the statements with strong consensus otorhinolaryngologists-head and neck surgeons who are pregnant, breastfeeding, or with childbearing potential should have the opportunity to receive SARS-Cov-2 vaccination. Moreover, personal protective equipment (PPE) should still be used even after the vaccination. Conclusion Until prospective evaluations on these topics are available, ORL-HNS must be considered a high infection risk specialty. While the use of PPE remains pivotal, ORL PBFHW should be allowed access to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination provided they receive up-to-date information

Validity and reliability of the COVID-19 symptom index, an instrument evaluating severity of general and otolaryngological symptoms

Background: There is no clinical instrument evaluating symptoms of COVID-19. Objective: To develop a clinical instrument for evaluating symptoms of COVID-19 mild-to-moderate forms. Methods: COVID-19 patients were recruited from EpiCURA Hospital (Belgium). They completed the COVID-19 Symptom Index (CSI) twice to assess the test-retest reliability. The internal consistency was evaluated with Cronbach’s alpha. CSI was completed by healthy subjects to assess the internal validity. Patients completed CSI 6 weeks after the COVID-19 resolution to evaluate the responsiveness to change. Results: Ninety-four COVID-19 patients and 55 healthy individuals completed the evaluations. Symptoms associated with the higher severity score were fatigue, headache and myalgia. The Cronbach’s alpha value was 0.801, indicating high internal consistency. The test-retest reliability was adequate (rs = 0.535, p =.001). The correlation between CSI total score and SNOT-22 was high (rs = 0.782; p <.001), supporting a high external validity. COVID-19 patients reported significant higher CSI score than healthy individuals, suggesting an adequate internal validity. The mean CSI significantly decreased after the COVID-19 resolution, supporting a high responsiveness to change property. Conclusion and significance: The CSI is a reliable and valid patient reported outcome questionnaire for the evaluation of symptom severity of COVID-19 patients.SCOPUS: ar.jDecretOANoAutActifinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Clinical features of patients who had two COVID-19 episodes: a European multicentre case series

International audienceObjective: To investigate the clinical features of patients who had two demonstrated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) episodes. Methods: Data of patients with both COVID-19 episodes were recruited from 22 March to 27 December 2020. The following outcomes were studied: epidemiological, comorbidities, prevalence and severity of general and otolaryngological symptom, olfactory, aroma, and gustatory dysfunctions. A comparison between first and second episodes was performed. Results: Forty-five patients reported having two confirmed COVID-19 episodes. The majority of patients had mild infections in both episodes. The second clinical episode was significantly similar to the first. The symptom duration of the second episode was shorter than the first. The occurrence of loss of smell was unpredictable from the first to the second episode. Conclusion: The recurrence of COVID-19 symptoms is associated with a similar clinical picture than the first episode in patients with initial mild-to-moderate COVID episode. The pathophysiological mechanisms underlying the development of second episode remain uncertain and may involve either true reinfection or virus reactivation from sanctuaries

Management of oral feeding following total laryngectomy around the world: YO‐IFOS international study

International audienceBackground: To analyze worldwide practices regarding the initiation of oral feeding after total laryngectomy (TL).Methods: Online survey.Results: Among the 332 responses received, 278 from 59 countries were analyzed. Our results showed that 45.6% of respondents started water and 45.1% started liquid diet between postoperative days 7 and 10. Semi-solid feeds were initiated between days 10 and 14 for 44.9% of respondents and a free diet was allowed after day 15 for 60.8% of respondents. This timing was significantly delayed in cases of laryngo-pharyngectomy and after prior radiotherapy (p < 0.001). A greater proportion of respondents in Africa and Oceania allowed early oral feeding before day 6 as compared with the rest of the world (p < 0.001).Conclusion: Despite increasing number of publications, there is still a lack of evidence to support early oral feeding. The majority of respondents preferred to delay its initiation until at least 7 days after surgery

Comprehensive management of paranasal sinus fungus balls: A Young‐IFOS consensus statement

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Appropriateness for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination for otolaryngologist and head and neck surgeons in case of pregnancy, breastfeeding, or childbearing potential:Yo-IFOS and CEORL-HNS joint clinical consensus statement

PURPOSE: SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are a key step in fighting the pandemic. Nevertheless, their rapid development did not allow for testing among specific population subgroups such as pregnant and breastfeeding women, or elaborating specific guidelines for healthcare personnel working in high infection risk specialties, such as otolaryngology (ORL). This clinical consensus statement (CCS) aims to offer guidance for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination to this high-risk population based on the best evidence available. METHODS: A multidisciplinary international panel of 33 specialists judged statements through a two-round modified Delphi method survey. Statements were designed to encompass the following topics: risk of SARS-Cov-2 infection and use of protective equipment in ORL; SARS-Cov-2 infection and vaccines and respective risks for the mother/child dyad; and counseling for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnant, breastfeeding, or fertile healthcare workers (PBFHW). All ORL PBFHW were considered as the target audience. RESULTS: Of the 13 statements, 7 reached consensus or strong consensus, 2 reached no consensus, and 2 reached near-consensus. According to the statements with strong consensus otorhinolaryngologists—head and neck surgeons who are pregnant, breastfeeding, or with childbearing potential should have the opportunity to receive SARS-Cov-2 vaccination. Moreover, personal protective equipment (PPE) should still be used even after the vaccination. CONCLUSION: Until prospective evaluations on these topics are available, ORL-HNS must be considered a high infection risk specialty. While the use of PPE remains pivotal, ORL PBFHW should be allowed access to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination provided they receive up-to-date information

Features of Mild-to-Moderate COVID-19 Patients With Dysphonia

International audienceIntroduction: To explore the prevalence of dysphonia in European patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and the clinical features of dysphonic patients.Methods: The clinical and epidemiological data of 702 patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 were collected from 19 European Hospitals. The following data were extracted: age, sex, ethnicity, tobacco consumption, comorbidities, general, and otolaryngological symptoms. Dysphonia and otolaryngological symptoms were self-assessed through a 4-point scale. The prevalence of dysphonia, as part of the COVID-19 symptoms, was assessed. The outcomes were compared between dysphonic and nondysphonic patients. The association between dysphonia severity and outcomes was studied through Bayesian analysis.Results: A total of 188 patients were dysphonic, accounting for 26.8% of cases. Females developed more frequently dysphonia than males (P = 0.022). The proportion of smokers was significantly higher in the dysphonic group (P = 0.042). The prevalence of the following symptoms was higher in dysphonic patients compared with nondysphonic patients: cough, chest pain, sticky sputum, arthralgia, diarrhea, headache, fatigue, nausea, and vomiting. The severity of dyspnea, dysphagia, ear pain, face pain, throat pain, and nasal obstruction was higher in dysphonic group compared with nondysphonic group. There were significant associations between the severity of dysphonia, dysphagia, and cough.Conclusion: Dysphonia may be encountered in a quarter of patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and should be considered as a symptom list of the infection. Dysphonic COVID-19 patients are more symptomatic than nondysphonic individuals. Future studies are needed to investigate the relevance of dysphonia in the COVID-19 clinical presentation