Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Jun 25;6(4):794-799.
doi: 10.1002/lio2.604. eCollection 2021 Aug.

Decision aid and preference assessment of topical anesthesia for otolaryngology procedures

Affiliations

Decision aid and preference assessment of topical anesthesia for otolaryngology procedures

Elliana K DeVore et al. Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. .

Abstract

Objectives: To determine preference patterns for topical anesthesia in patients undergoing endoscopy pre-coronavirus (2019 coronavirus disease [COVID-19]) pandemic and analyze outcomes based on preference, using a decision aid format.

Methods: A decision aid was developed with expert and patient input. New patients presenting to subspecialty clinics over a 2-month pre-COVID-19 period completed a pre-procedure survey about their priorities, then were asked to choose between topical oxymetazoline/lidocaine spray or none. A post-procedure outcome survey followed.

Results: Of 151 patients, 90.1% patients elected to have topical anesthesia. Top patient priorities were "I want the scope to be easy for the doctor" and "I want to be as comfortable as possible." Patients who strongly wanted to avoid medication (P = .002) and bad taste (P = .003) were more likely to select no spray, whereas those who wanted to avoid pain received anesthetic (P = .011). According to the post-procedure assessment, 95.4% of patients were satisfied or strongly satisfied their choice, and this did not correlate with anesthetic vs none.

Conclusions: Patient preferences are easily elicited and correlate with treatment choices. Most patients chose to have topical anesthetic and were willing to tolerate side effects; however, both patients with and without topical anesthetic were satisfied with their choices. This decision aid can be used to optimize shared decision making in the otolaryngology clinic. Given the aerosolizing potential of both spray and no spray conditions, this insight may be consequential when devising office protocols for post-COVID-19 practice.

Level of evidence: II.

Keywords: COVID‐19; SARS‐CoV‐2; anesthetics; coronavirus; decision making; local; patient preference; shared; surveys and questionnaires.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no potential conflict of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Response distributions to priority items

Similar articles

References

    1. Saif AM, Farboud A, Delfosse E, Pope L, Adke M. Assessing the safety and efficacy of drugs used in preparing the nose for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures: a systematic review. Clin Otolaryngol. 2016;41(5):546‐563. - PubMed
    1. Young VN, Smith LJ, Rosen CA. Comparison of tolerance and cost‐effectiveness of two nasal anesthesia techniques for transnasal flexible laryngoscopy. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014;150(4):582‐586. - PubMed
    1. Conlin AE, McLean L. Systematic review and meta‐analysis assessing the effectiveness of local anesthetic, vasoconstrictive, and lubricating agents in flexible fibre‐optic nasolaryngoscopy. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008;37(2):240‐249. - PubMed
    1. Hwang SH, Park CS, Kim BG, Cho JH, Kang JM. Topical anesthetic preparations for rigid and flexible endoscopy: a meta‐analysis. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2015;272:263‐270. - PubMed
    1. Sunkaraneni VS, Jones SE. Topical anaesthetic or vasoconstrictor preparations for flexible fibre‐optic nasal pharyngoscopy and laryngoscopy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;3:CD005606. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources