Resource utilization and variation among practitioners for evaluating voice hoarseness secondary to suspected reflux disease: A retrospective chart review

The purpose of this study was to assess the variation in resource utilization for the diagnosis and treatment of dysphonia or hoarseness in patients with suspected laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPRD) and/or gastroesophageal reflux (GERD). Secondary data was collected from a single-institution database of charts from patients evaluated between October 1, 2011 and March 31, 2020. This study was conducted as a retrospective chart review. Key outcome variables included demographic data, initial specialty visit, date of first symptom evaluation to final follow-up visit, additional procedural evaluation, and final diagnosis as attributed by the diagnosing physician. Inclusion criteria included patients ≥18 older referred to providers for suspected LPRD/GERD with a primary complaint of voice changes or hoarseness and appeared for follow-up. A total of 134 subjects were included for analysis. Data analysis included descriptive and univariate analysis, chi-square test of independence, independent means t test, and 1-way analysis of variance. Most patients (88) received some form of procedural evaluation in addition to clinical evaluation. The most frequent was videostroboscopy (59). Patients who first visited a gastroenterologist were more likely to undergo esophageal pH-monitoring (n = 14, P < .001) and manometry (n = 10, P < .001). Patients referred to speech-language pathology were very likely to undergo videostroboscopic evaluation (n = 7, P < .001). The prevailing final diagnosis as attributed by the diagnosing physician was confirmed to be of non-reflux etiology (49) or due to GERD alone (34). LPRD only was the least frequent diagnosis (10). Our results demonstrate that there is significant variation in the number and type of diagnostic tests based on the type of practitioner initially seen by the patient. Additionally, of patients thought to have voice change or hoarseness because of LPRD and/or GERD, more than a third had a non-reflux cause of their symptoms. Further research should identify beneficial patterns in resource utilization and further diagnostic utility of diagnostic procedures for more accurate diagnosis.

Best Practices in Treatment of Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Disease: A Multidisciplinary Modified Delphi Study

BACKGROUND

Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is a common otolaryngologic diagnosis. Treatment of presumed LPR remains challenging, and limited frameworks exist to guide treatment.

METHODS

Using RAND/University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Appropriateness Methods, a modified Delphi approach identified consensus statements to guide LPR treatment. Experts independently and blindly scored proposed statements on importance, scientific acceptability, usability, and feasibility in a four-round iterative process. Accepted measures reached scores with ≥ 80% agreement in the 7-9 range (on a 9-point Likert scale) across all four categories.

RESULTS

Fifteen experts rated 36 proposed initial statements. In round one, 10 (27.8%) statements were rated as valid. In round two, 8 statements were modified based on panel suggestions, and experts subsequently rated 5 of these statements as valid. Round three's discussion refined statements not yet accepted, and in round four, additional voting identified 2 additional statements as valid. In total, 17 (47.2%) best practice statements reached consensus, touching on topics as varied as role of empiric treatment, medication use, lifestyle modifications, and indications for laryngoscopy.

CONCLUSION

Using a well-tested methodology, best practice statements in the treatment of LPR were identified. The statements serve to guide physicians on LPR treatment considerations.

Validation and Reliability of Polish Version of the Reflux Symptoms Index and Reflux Finding Score

(1) Background: To confirm the credibility, consistency, and replicability of the Polish versions of the Reflux Symptoms Index (PL-RSI) and the Reflux Finding Score (PL-RFS). (2) Methods: The translation followed the WHO recommendations. The study group included 100 volunteers (age 15−87) with hoarseness and pharyngolaryngeal complaints. The control group comprised 55 healthy volunteers (age 20−75). Study participants completed the PL-RSI; then, two independent otolaryngologists completed the PL-RFS based on pharyngeal videostroboscopy. Questionnaires were repeated after 7 days, with no treatment before the second round. Additionally, patients underwent 24 h pH-metry. The control group had a single round of questionnaires followed by pH-metry. (3) Results: The PL-RSI is consistent, reliable (Cronbach’s alpha 0.77−0.83; test−retest reliability 0.83), and significantly correlated with other patient-filled tools (p < 0.001). The PL-RFS intra-rater reliability is 0.84−0.91, and inter-rater is 0.88. Both questionnaires strongly correlate with pH-metry (PL-RSI upright Ryan Score 0.35, PL-RFS—0.60). Both clearly distinguish (i) healthy from persons with voice disorders, but without acid LPR (p < 0.0001), and (ii) within patient group between subjects with and without acid LPR (p = 0.0002). (4) Conclusions: The PL-RSI and PL-RFS are reliable and can be recommended to Polish-speaking otolaryngologists. Our findings confirm the role of country-specific factors in RSI results and that practitioners should always use a proper control group.

Response of Laryngopharyngeal Symptoms to Transoral Incisionless Fundoplication in Patients with Refractory Proven Gastroesophageal Reflux

OBJECTIVE

Patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) symptoms may not respond to proton pump inhibitors (PPI) if they have an alternative laryngeal diagnosis or high-volume reflux. Transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) or TIF with concomitant hiatal hernia repair (cTIF) are effective in decreasing symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) but are not well studied in patients with LPR symptoms. This prospective multicenter study assessed the patient-reported and clinical outcomes after TIF/cTIF in patients with LPR symptoms and proven GERD.

METHODS

Patients with refractory LPR symptoms (reflux symptom index [RSI] > 13) and with erosive esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, and/or pathologic acid reflux by distal esophageal pH testing were evaluated before and after a minimum of 6 months after TIF/cTIF. The primary outcome was normalization of RSI. Secondary outcomes were >50% improvement in GERD-Health-Related Quality of Life (GERD-HRQL), normalization of esophageal acid exposure time, discontinuation of PPI, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Forty-nine patients had TIF (n = 26) or cTIF (n = 23) with at least 6 months follow-up. Mean pre- and post TIF/cTIF RSI were 23.6 and 5.9 (mean difference: 17.7, P < .001). Post TIF/cTIF, 90% of patients had improved GERD-HQRL score, 85% normalized RSI, 75% normalized esophageal acid exposure time, and 80% discontinued PPI. No serious procedure-related adverse events occurred. Patient satisfaction was 4% prior to TIF/cTIF and 73% after TIF/cTIF (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In patients with objective evidence of GERD, TIF, or cTIF are safe and effective in controlling LPR symptoms as measured by normalization of RSI and improvement in patient satisfaction after TIF/cTIF.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4.

How to Understand and Treat Laryngopharyngeal Reflux

Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) is frustrating, as symptoms are nonspecific and diagnosis is often unclear. Two main approaches to diagnosis are empiric treatment trials and objective reflux testing. Initial empiric trial of Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) twice daily for 2-3 months is convenient, but risks overtreatment and delayed diagnosis if patient complaints are not from LPR. Dietary modifications, H2-antagonists, alginates, and fundoplication are other possible LPR treatments. If objective diagnosis is desired or patients' symptoms are refractory to empiric treatment, pH testing with/without impedance should be considered. Additionally, evaluation for non-reflux etiologies of complaints should be performed, including laryngoscopy or videostroboscopy.

Adaptation and Validation of Reflux Symptom Index Into Kannada Language

OBJECTIVE

The present study aimed to translate, validate the Reflux Symptom Index in Kannada language and to compare its outcomes between normal individuals and individuals with laryngopharyngeal reflux.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross sectional study design MATERIALS AND METHOD: : The English version of Reflux Symptom Index was translated into Kannada language using standard procedures. A total of 162 participants participated in the study, 81 with laryngopharyngeal reflux and 81 controls. Internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and clinical validity were calculated.

RESULTS

Results revealed that the Kannada Reflux Symptom Index exhibited an excellent internal consistency (α = 0.87). The average intra-class correlation coefficient was 0.90 and 0.92, indicating excellent test-retest reliability. Independent sample t test revealed a statistically significant difference between the total scores of both the groups, thereby exhibiting good clinical validity of RSI-K (t = 42.71, df = 158, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The Kannada Reflux Symptom Index is a reliable and valid tool for use in patients with laryngopharyngeal reflux. It can be used as a quick tool to assess laryngopharyngeal reflux.

Can the Reflux Finding Score and Reflux Symptom Index Be Used to Evaluate the Severity of Esophagitis in Children?

OBJECTIVES

Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), a growing issue in ear, nose, and throat (ENT) and pediatric medicine, is the backflow of stomach contents into the laryngopharynx. Patients present with frequent upper and/or lower respiratory tract infections and coughs, associated with acid- and pepsin-mediated injury to the mucosae of the larynx and pharynx. LPR is associated with rhinosinusitis, laryngitis, pneumonia, and asthma. Children with LPR often fail to exhibit classic gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms, or such symptoms may be intermittent. Only a few studies have sought correlations among symptoms, endoscopic findings, and the results of frequently used diagnostic tests.

THE AIM OF OUR STUDY

We sought associations among the Reflux Finding Score (RFS), Reflux Symptom Index (RSI), and the pathological extent of esophagitis.

METHODS

We reviewed data on children who underwent upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopy and showed LPR symptoms, as reported by the ENT department. The RSI was scored by pediatric gastroenterologists and the RFS by ENT doctors, via laryngoscopic examination. The pathological esophageal data were evaluated retrospectively.

RESULTS

We treated 52 patients (29 boys) with a mean age of 11.4 ± 4.5 years. On pathological evaluation, one patient exhibited normal esophageal findings, while 28 showed mild esophagitis, 16 esophagitis, and 8 severe esophagitis. Thirteen patients showed esophageal pseudopolypoid lesions secondary to gastroesophageal reflux disease on endoscopic examination, but were human papilloma virus-negative. There was no correlation among the RFS, RSI score, and age, but there was a significant correlation between the pathological data and the RFS (P = 0.010; r = 0.461).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of LPR/esophagitis in children may differ from that in adults. Therefore, ENT specialists should determine esophagitis status in children and, if necessary, consult pediatric gastroenterologists.

Trends in Diagnostic Flexible Laryngoscopy and Videolaryngostroboscopy Utilization in the US Medicare Population

Importance

Diagnostic flexible laryngoscopy (DFL) is the second-most reimbursed procedure by Medicare in otolaryngology. However, the economic trends of this procedure on a population level are unknown.

Objective

To describe national- and state-level DFL and videolaryngostroboscopy (VLS) utilization and payment trends from 2000 to 2016 in the Medicare population.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This population-based, cross-sectional study of all Medicare beneficiaries from 2000 through 2016 found that at the national level the total absolute number of DFLs performed in the US Medicare population increased by 87% from 344 183 to 645 172 services, whereas total absolute payments for DFLs made by Medicare concurrently increased by 41% from $38 720 243 to $54 499 071. Rates of DLS and VLS categorized as Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code 31575 and 31579, respectively. Analysis was carried out between November 18, 2018 and December 18, 2018.

Exposures

Diagnostic flexible laryngoscopy and VLS.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The DFL and VLS utilization rates, payments, and reimbursement rate trends were analyzed by year and state. Utilization was assessed for physician characteristics, including specialty and credentials.

Results

Nationally from 2000 to 2016 in the Medicare population, DFL utilization per Medicare enrollee increased 30% from 0.0087 to 0.0110 and payment per enrollee decreased 2% from $0.98 to $0.96, whereas VLS utilization and payment per enrollee both increased at least 300% during the same time period, with VLS procedure per enrollee and payment per enrollee increasing by 382% from 0.00028 to 0.0013 and 301% from $0.05 to $0.22, respectively. There was a weak correlation between reimbursement and utilization per enrollee for both DFL (r = 0.23; 95% CI, 0.12-0.34) and VLS (r = 0.26; 95% CI, 0.14-0.37) performed from 2012 to 2016. In 2016, the mean (SD) payment per DFL was $85.14 ($7.95), ranging from $65.45 in Puerto Rico to $104.82 in Washington, DC, a 1.6-fold difference. For VLS, there was a 2-fold difference between the lowest-reimbursing state, Maine ($92.20) and the highest, New York ($182.96). All US dollar values were uniformly adjusted for inflation to 2018 dollar values. Most DFLs in 2016 were performed by otolaryngologists (93.6%).

Conclusions and Relevance

The DFL utilization rates remained stable compared with VLS in the Medicare population from 2000 to 2016. There was a decrease in both DFL and VLS payments per procedure in the same time period and also weak correlations between reimbursement and utilization. Practice patterns and reimbursement varied geographically across the United States, though VLS exhibited significantly higher variation than DFL at the state level.

Does the accuracy of case history affect interpretation of videolaryngostroboscopic exams?

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of initial diagnostic hypotheses on clinicians' 1) detection and perceived severity of abnormalities, and 2) clinical impressions and treatment recommendations for individuals with and without voice disorders following interpretation of videolaryngostroboscopy (VLS).

METHODS

Thirty-two experienced speech-language pathologists and otolaryngologists specializing in voice disorders read case histories prior to interpreting exams. Case histories suggested specific accurate or inaccurate laryngeal diagnoses, or a control scenario that suggested a normal larynx. The effects of the accuracy of case histories on perceived severity of associated visual-perceptual parameters, clinical impressions, and treatment recommendations were examined.

RESULTS

Significant increases in perceived severity of posterior laryngeal appearance (P < 0.05) and mucosal wave (P < 0.02) were observed when these abnormalities were suggested by case histories. Overall agreement with clinical impressions improved from 49% to 72% when the case history was consistent with the examination. Case histories (accurate and inaccurate) indicating voice symptoms predicted recommendations for treatment above and beyond that of VLS presentation alone, P < 0.001.

CONCLUSION

Case histories suggesting specific abnormalities significantly affected severity ratings for two of three associated visual-perceptual parameters selected as primary outcome measures. Accurate case histories suggesting specific abnormalities increased the probability of detection and perceived severity. Inaccurate case histories led to false-positive findings and failures to detect abnormalities or to interpret them as less severe. Case histories affected visual-perceptual judgments and contributed to decisions about clinical impressions and treatment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2b Laryngoscope, 130:718-725, 2020.

Hoarseness Guidelines Redux: Toward Improved Treatment of Patients with Dysphonia

The Hoarseness Guideline Update provides an evidence-based approach to a patient who presents to the clinic with hoarseness. The guidelines cover management decisions in acute and chronic dysphonia for patients of all ages before and after laryngeal examination. The present review discusses the process used to develop these guidelines, including limitations of the process and each key action statement.

Associations between Community-Acquired Pneumonia and Proton Pump Inhibitors in the Laryngeal/Voice-Disordered Population

OBJECTIVES

To examine the relationship between community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment among patients with laryngeal/voice disorders.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort analysis.

SETTING

Large national administrative US claims database.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Patients were included if they were ≥18 years old; had outpatient treatment for a laryngeal/voice disorder from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2014 (per International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes); had 12 months of continuous enrollment prior to the index date (ie, first diagnosis of laryngeal/voice disorder); had no preindex diagnosis of CAP; and had prescription claims captured from 1 year preindex to end of follow-up. Patient demographics, comorbid conditions, index laryngeal diagnosis, number of unique preindex patient encounters, and CAP diagnoses during the postindex 3 years were collected. Two models-a time-dependent Cox regression model and a propensity score-based approach with a marginal structural model-were separately performed for patients with and without pre-index date PPI prescriptions.

RESULTS

A total of 392,355 unique patients met inclusion criteria; 188,128 (47.9%) had a PPI prescription. The 3-year absolute risk for CAP was 4.0% and 5.3% among patients without and with preindex PPI use, respectively. For patients without and with pre-index date PPI use, the CAP occurrence for a person who had already received a PPI is 30% to 50% higher, respectively, than for a person who had not yet had a PPI but may receive one later.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients without and with pre-index date PPI use experienced a roughly 30% to 50% increased likelihood of CAP, respectively, as compared with patients who had not had PPI prescriptions.

Update on Management of Hoarseness

Dysphonia is altered voice quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs communication or decreases voice-related quality of life. Hoarseness is vocal roughness and a possible manifestation of dysphonia. This article uses the broader term dysphonia because it reflects of a wide range of voice complaints, with or without vocal roughness. Dysphonia is often caused by benign conditions but may also be the sentinel symptom of a serious or progressive condition requiring immediate diagnosis and management. The role of laryngeal visualization in assessment and diagnosis for these patients is critical.

Speech Language Pathology Rehabilitation

The speech language pathologist has a vital management role in patients with voice and swallow concerns, as well as stroke patients and patients with fluency problems. This article summarizes the variety of speech and swallow rehabilitation that adult patients may require or seek. The case examples allow the reader to base the clinical decision-making process within the context of a patient presentation and elucidate the role of speech and language pathology services for the primary care provider in order to refer patients with symptoms and concerns to the right provider early in their medical care.

Proton pump inhibitors: Review of reported risks and controversies

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the most prescribed classes of drugs in this day and age. These may be beneficial to treat many gastrointestinal conditions, such as gastroesophageal reflux or Barrett's esophagus as well as laryngopharyngeal reflux. However, many reports have emerged in the literature exposing the potential association of PPIs with various risks and complications such as bone fracture, infection, myocardial infarction, renal disease, and dementia. This review highlights many of these potential adverse side effects by exploring relevant publications and addressing the controversies associated with those findings. The diligent otolaryngologist should be aware of the current state of the literature and the risks associated with prescribing PPIs to insure proper counseling of their patients.

Level of Evidence

5

Clinical Practice Guideline: Hoarseness (Dysphonia) (Update)

Objective

This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations on treating patients who present with dysphonia, which is characterized by altered vocal quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs communication and/or quality of life. Dysphonia affects nearly one-third of the population at some point in its life. This guideline applies to all age groups evaluated in a setting where dysphonia would be identified or managed. It is intended for all clinicians who are likely to diagnose and treat patients with dysphonia.

Purpose

The primary purpose of this guideline is to improve the quality of care for patients with dysphonia, based on current best evidence. Expert consensus to fill evidence gaps, when used, is explicitly stated and supported with a detailed evidence profile for transparency. Specific objectives of the guideline are to reduce inappropriate variations in care, produce optimal health outcomes, and minimize harm. For this guideline update, the American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation selected a panel representing the fields of advanced practice nursing, bronchoesophagology, consumer advocacy, family medicine, geriatric medicine, internal medicine, laryngology, neurology, otolaryngology–head and neck surgery, pediatrics, professional voice, pulmonology, and speech-language pathology.

Action Statements

The guideline update group made strong recommendations for the following key action statements (KASs): (1) Clinicians should assess the patient with dysphonia by history and physical examination to identify factors where expedited laryngeal evaluation is indicated. These include, but are not limited to, recent surgical procedures involving the head, neck, or chest; recent endotracheal intubation; presence of concomitant neck mass; respiratory distress or stridor; history of tobacco abuse; and whether the patient is a professional voice user. (2) Clinicians should advocate voice therapy for patients with dysphonia from a cause amenable to voice therapy. The guideline update group made recommendations for the following KASs: (1) Clinicians should identify dysphonia in a patient with altered voice quality, pitch, loudness, or vocal effort that impairs communication or reduces quality of life (QOL). (2) Clinicians should assess the patient with dysphonia by history and physical examination for underlying causes of dysphonia and factors that modify management. (3) Clinicians should perform laryngoscopy, or refer to a clinician who can perform laryngoscopy, when dysphonia fails to resolve or improve within 4 weeks or irrespective of duration if a serious underlying cause is suspected. (4) Clinicians should perform diagnostic laryngoscopy, or refer to a clinician who can perform diagnostic laryngoscopy, before prescribing voice therapy and document/communicate the results to the speech-language pathologist (SLP). (5) Clinicians should advocate for surgery as a therapeutic option for patients with dysphonia with conditions amenable to surgical intervention, such as suspected malignancy, symptomatic benign vocal fold lesions that do not respond to conservative management, or glottic insufficiency. (6) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, botulinum toxin injections for the treatment of dysphonia caused by spasmodic dysphonia and other types of laryngeal dystonia. (7) Clinicians should inform patients with dysphonia about control/preventive measures. (8) Clinicians should document resolution, improvement or worsened symptoms of dysphonia, or change in QOL of patients with dysphonia after treatment or observation. The guideline update group made a strong recommendation against 1 action: (1) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe antibiotics to treat dysphonia. The guideline update group made recommendations against other actions: (1) Clinicians should not obtain computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for patients with a primary voice complaint prior to visualization of the larynx. (2) Clinicians should not prescribe antireflux medications to treat isolated dysphonia, based on symptoms alone attributed to suspected gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR), without visualization of the larynx. (3) Clinicians should not routinely prescribe corticosteroids for patients with dysphonia prior to visualization of the larynx. The policy level for the following recommendation about laryngoscopy at any time was an option: (1) Clinicians may perform diagnostic laryngoscopy at any time in a patient with dysphonia.

Disclaimer

This clinical practice guideline is not intended as an exhaustive source of guidance for managing dysphonia (hoarseness). Rather, it is designed to assist clinicians by providing an evidence-based framework for decision-making strategies. The guideline is not intended to replace clinical judgment or establish a protocol for all individuals with this condition, and it may not provide the only appropriate approach to diagnosing and managing this problem. Differences from Prior Guideline (1) Incorporation of new evidence profiles to include the role of patient preferences, confidence in the evidence, differences of opinion, quality improvement opportunities, and any exclusion to which the action statement does not apply (2) Inclusion of 3 new guidelines, 16 new systematic reviews, and 4 new randomized controlled trials (3) Inclusion of a consumer advocate on the guideline update group (4) Changes to 9 KASs from the original guideline (5) New KAS 3 (escalation of care) and KAS 13 (outcomes) (6) Addition of an algorithm outlining KASs for patients with dysphonia

Pharmacologic management of voice disorders by general medicine providers and otolaryngologists

OBJECTIVES

1) To compare laryngeal diagnoses from general medical providers (GMP) to otolaryngologists following GMP-based medication trial, and 2) to evaluate associations between GMP medication trials and pharmacologic treatment by otolaryngologists.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort analysis using large, national administrative U.S. claims database. Patients with laryngeal/voice disorders as per the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2012, seen by a GMP and then an otolaryngologist between 2 weeks to 3 months after the GMP visit, were included. Patient demographics, comorbid conditions, medication use, and initial GMP and otolaryngology laryngeal diagnoses were collected. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate the association between GMP and otolaryngologist medication trials.

RESULTS

A total of 12,475 unique laryngeal/voice-disordered patients met inclusion criteria. At the initial GMP visit, 15.3% received an antibiotic, 14.0% a proton pump inhibitor (PPI), and 7.7% an oral steroid. After the otolaryngology visit, increased diagnoses of vocal fold paralysis/paresis, benign vocal fold/laryngeal pathology, chronic laryngitis, and multiple diagnoses occurred. The adjusted odds for an otolaryngologist prescribing an antibiotic, PPI, or oral steroid, respectively, given that a GMP prescribed an antibiotic, PPI, or oral steroid, was roughly two to three times higher that of a GMP not prescribing the given medication.

CONCLUSION

Patients with structural and neuromuscular laryngeal disorders were treated with medications by GMPs, and similar mediations often were repeated after otolaryngology evaluation. These findings suggest potential areas of unnecessary pharmacologic treatment of laryngeal/voice-disordered patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2b. Laryngoscope, 128:682-689, 2018.