National laryngopharyngectomy and reconstructive surgery survey

Jeremy D. Richmon, Hussein A. Samji, Daniel G. Deschler

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objectives/Hypothesis: To understand the various methods available to reconstruct total laryngopharyngectomy defects and to understand which, and to what degree, various factors influence the surgeon in choosing a particular reconstructive method. Methods: Otolaryngologists and plastic surgeons who perform head and neck reconstruction were surveyed regarding preference of laryngopharyngectomy reconstruction. Numerical and rank-order data was analyzed using T statistics and Fisher exact test. Results: Two hundred surveys were mailed and 72 physicians (36% response rate) provided data, with otolaryngologists comprising 54% of the respondents. Otolaryngologists were more likely to consider voice (P-.003) and swallowing (P- .02) outcomes compared to plastic surgeons. In contrast, plastic surgeons more often included cosmesis(P-.05) among those factors influencing their reconstructive choice. However, rank-order analysis demonstrated no statistical difference between plastic surgeons and otolar- yngologists with respect to each factor. Conclusions: Our study sought to examine what motivates surgeons from several specialties to choose one reconstructive method over another for laryngo- pharyngeal defects. Otolaryngologists were more likely to consider voice and swallowing function in contrast to plastic surgeons, who more frequently included cosmesis as a factor. However, when physicians were asked to rank the importance of each of the eight factors from most to least important in influencing their reconstructive option, there was no statistical difference between plastic surgeons and otolaryngologists with respect to each factor. Further research is necessary to provide an evidence base for which reconstructive method offers the optimal functional restoration.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1472-1478
Number of pages7
JournalLaryngoscope
Volume119
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Reconstructive Surgical Procedures
Deglutition
Physicians
Surveys and Questionnaires
Surgeons
Otolaryngologists
Neck
Head

Keywords

  • Laryngopharyngectomy
  • Otolaryngologist
  • Plastic surgeon
  • Reconstruction
  • Surgeon preference

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Richmon, J. D., Samji, H. A., & Deschler, D. G. (2009). National laryngopharyngectomy and reconstructive surgery survey. Laryngoscope, 119(8), 1472-1478. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.20251

National laryngopharyngectomy and reconstructive surgery survey. / Richmon, Jeremy D.; Samji, Hussein A.; Deschler, Daniel G.

In: Laryngoscope, Vol. 119, No. 8, 08.2009, p. 1472-1478.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Richmon, JD, Samji, HA & Deschler, DG 2009, 'National laryngopharyngectomy and reconstructive surgery survey', Laryngoscope, vol. 119, no. 8, pp. 1472-1478. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.20251
Richmon, Jeremy D. ; Samji, Hussein A. ; Deschler, Daniel G. / National laryngopharyngectomy and reconstructive surgery survey. In: Laryngoscope. 2009 ; Vol. 119, No. 8. pp. 1472-1478.
@article{03636a6fb5fb42938d9d7edfa36b7468,
title = "National laryngopharyngectomy and reconstructive surgery survey",
abstract = "Objectives/Hypothesis: To understand the various methods available to reconstruct total laryngopharyngectomy defects and to understand which, and to what degree, various factors influence the surgeon in choosing a particular reconstructive method. Methods: Otolaryngologists and plastic surgeons who perform head and neck reconstruction were surveyed regarding preference of laryngopharyngectomy reconstruction. Numerical and rank-order data was analyzed using T statistics and Fisher exact test. Results: Two hundred surveys were mailed and 72 physicians (36{\%} response rate) provided data, with otolaryngologists comprising 54{\%} of the respondents. Otolaryngologists were more likely to consider voice (P-.003) and swallowing (P- .02) outcomes compared to plastic surgeons. In contrast, plastic surgeons more often included cosmesis(P-.05) among those factors influencing their reconstructive choice. However, rank-order analysis demonstrated no statistical difference between plastic surgeons and otolar- yngologists with respect to each factor. Conclusions: Our study sought to examine what motivates surgeons from several specialties to choose one reconstructive method over another for laryngo- pharyngeal defects. Otolaryngologists were more likely to consider voice and swallowing function in contrast to plastic surgeons, who more frequently included cosmesis as a factor. However, when physicians were asked to rank the importance of each of the eight factors from most to least important in influencing their reconstructive option, there was no statistical difference between plastic surgeons and otolaryngologists with respect to each factor. Further research is necessary to provide an evidence base for which reconstructive method offers the optimal functional restoration.",
keywords = "Laryngopharyngectomy, Otolaryngologist, Plastic surgeon, Reconstruction, Surgeon preference",
author = "Richmon, {Jeremy D.} and Samji, {Hussein A.} and Deschler, {Daniel G.}",
year = "2009",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1002/lary.20251",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "119",
pages = "1472--1478",
journal = "Laryngoscope",
issn = "0023-852X",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - National laryngopharyngectomy and reconstructive surgery survey

AU - Richmon, Jeremy D.

AU - Samji, Hussein A.

AU - Deschler, Daniel G.

PY - 2009/8

Y1 - 2009/8

N2 - Objectives/Hypothesis: To understand the various methods available to reconstruct total laryngopharyngectomy defects and to understand which, and to what degree, various factors influence the surgeon in choosing a particular reconstructive method. Methods: Otolaryngologists and plastic surgeons who perform head and neck reconstruction were surveyed regarding preference of laryngopharyngectomy reconstruction. Numerical and rank-order data was analyzed using T statistics and Fisher exact test. Results: Two hundred surveys were mailed and 72 physicians (36% response rate) provided data, with otolaryngologists comprising 54% of the respondents. Otolaryngologists were more likely to consider voice (P-.003) and swallowing (P- .02) outcomes compared to plastic surgeons. In contrast, plastic surgeons more often included cosmesis(P-.05) among those factors influencing their reconstructive choice. However, rank-order analysis demonstrated no statistical difference between plastic surgeons and otolar- yngologists with respect to each factor. Conclusions: Our study sought to examine what motivates surgeons from several specialties to choose one reconstructive method over another for laryngo- pharyngeal defects. Otolaryngologists were more likely to consider voice and swallowing function in contrast to plastic surgeons, who more frequently included cosmesis as a factor. However, when physicians were asked to rank the importance of each of the eight factors from most to least important in influencing their reconstructive option, there was no statistical difference between plastic surgeons and otolaryngologists with respect to each factor. Further research is necessary to provide an evidence base for which reconstructive method offers the optimal functional restoration.

AB - Objectives/Hypothesis: To understand the various methods available to reconstruct total laryngopharyngectomy defects and to understand which, and to what degree, various factors influence the surgeon in choosing a particular reconstructive method. Methods: Otolaryngologists and plastic surgeons who perform head and neck reconstruction were surveyed regarding preference of laryngopharyngectomy reconstruction. Numerical and rank-order data was analyzed using T statistics and Fisher exact test. Results: Two hundred surveys were mailed and 72 physicians (36% response rate) provided data, with otolaryngologists comprising 54% of the respondents. Otolaryngologists were more likely to consider voice (P-.003) and swallowing (P- .02) outcomes compared to plastic surgeons. In contrast, plastic surgeons more often included cosmesis(P-.05) among those factors influencing their reconstructive choice. However, rank-order analysis demonstrated no statistical difference between plastic surgeons and otolar- yngologists with respect to each factor. Conclusions: Our study sought to examine what motivates surgeons from several specialties to choose one reconstructive method over another for laryngo- pharyngeal defects. Otolaryngologists were more likely to consider voice and swallowing function in contrast to plastic surgeons, who more frequently included cosmesis as a factor. However, when physicians were asked to rank the importance of each of the eight factors from most to least important in influencing their reconstructive option, there was no statistical difference between plastic surgeons and otolaryngologists with respect to each factor. Further research is necessary to provide an evidence base for which reconstructive method offers the optimal functional restoration.

KW - Laryngopharyngectomy

KW - Otolaryngologist

KW - Plastic surgeon

KW - Reconstruction

KW - Surgeon preference

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=68849109485&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=68849109485&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/lary.20251

DO - 10.1002/lary.20251

M3 - Article

C2 - 19444893

AN - SCOPUS:68849109485

VL - 119

SP - 1472

EP - 1478

JO - Laryngoscope

JF - Laryngoscope

SN - 0023-852X

IS - 8

ER -