Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016 Jul;155(1):56-64. doi: 10.1177/0194599816651036.

Does an Otolaryngology-Specific Database Have Added Value? A Comparative Feasibility Analysis.

Author information

1
Ear Nose Throat Department, Hospital Universitari de la Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain.
2
Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
3
Division of Head and Neck Surgery and Communication Sciences, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
4
Department of Otolaryngology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
5
Division of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Connecticut Health, Farmington, Connecticut, USA.
6
Puget Sound Hearing & Balance Group, Northwest Hospital, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
7
Department of Otolaryngology, Hofstra North Shore-LIJ School of Medicine, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, New Hyde Park, New York, USA.
8
Division of Otolaryngology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA jennifer_shin@meei.harvard.edu.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

There are multiple nationally representative databases that support epidemiologic and outcomes research, and it is unknown whether an otolaryngology-specific resource would prove indispensable or superfluous. Therefore, our objective was to determine the feasibility of analyses in the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) databases as compared with the otolaryngology-specific Creating Healthcare Excellence through Education and Research (CHEER) database.

STUDY DESIGN:

Parallel analyses in 2 data sets.

SETTING:

Ambulatory visits in the United States.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS:

To test a fixed hypothesis that could be directly compared between data sets, we focused on a condition with expected prevalence high enough to substantiate availability in both. This query also encompassed a broad span of diagnoses to sample the breadth of available information. Specifically, we compared an assessment of suspected risk factors for sensorineural hearing loss in subjects 0 to 21 years of age, according to a predetermined protocol. We also assessed the feasibility of 6 additional diagnostic queries among all age groups.

RESULTS:

In the NAMCS/NHAMCS data set, the number of measured observations was not sufficient to support reliable numeric conclusions (percentage standard error among risk factors: 38.6-92.1). Analysis of the CHEER database demonstrated that age, sex, meningitis, and cytomegalovirus were statistically significant factors associated with pediatric sensorineural hearing loss (P < .01). Among the 6 additional diagnostic queries assessed, NAMCS/NHAMCS usage was also infeasible; the CHEER database contained 1585 to 212,521 more observations per annum.

CONCLUSION:

An otolaryngology-specific database has added utility when compared with already available national ambulatory databases.

KEYWORDS:

Ménière’s disease; adenoid hypertrophy; cholesteatoma; chronic otitis media; database; hearing loss; inferior turbinate hypertrophy; methodology; otolaryngology; pediatric; practice-based network; registry; sudden hearing loss

PMID:
27371627
PMCID:
PMC5072747
DOI:
10.1177/0194599816651036
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: Jennifer J. Shin, receives textbook royalties from Evidence-Based Otolaryngology (Springer) and Otolaryngology Prep and Practice (Plural Publishing). She is a recipient of a Harvard Medical School Shore Foundation / Center for Faculty Development Grant. Sponsorships: National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders. Funding source: National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders CHEER infrastructure grant (1U24DC012206-01A1).

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Atypon Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center