Jesse M. Hackell
Jesse M. Hackell has a total of 175 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
Richard M. Rosenfeld
SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York, USA
5 shared publicationsSeth R. Schwartz
Department of Otolaryngology, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
5 shared publicationsDavid E. Tunkel
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
4 shared publications- Richard M. Rosenfeld
Department of Otolaryngology, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York, USA
4 shared publications Helene J. Krouse
College of Nursing, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA
3 shared publicationsLorraine C. Nnacheta
American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA
3 shared publications
Latest Publications
- Top Cited PapersOpen Access
- 7 January 2020
- Published by Wiley in Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery
- Vol. 162 (S1) , S1-S38
Clinical Practice Guideline: Nosebleed (Epistaxis)
Objective: Nosebleed, also known as epistaxis, is a common problem that occurs at some point in at least 60% of people in the United States. While the majority of nosebleeds are limited in severity and duration, about 6% of people who experience nosebleeds will seek medical attention. For the purposes of this guideline, we define the target patient with a nosebleed as a patient with bleeding from the nostril, nasal cavity, or nasopharynx that is sufficient to warrant medical advice or care. This includes bleeding that is severe, persistent, and/or recurrent, as well as bleeding that impacts a patient’s quality of life. Interventions for nosebleeds range from self‐treatment and home remedies to more intensive procedural interventions in medical offices, emergency departments, hospitals, and operating rooms. Epistaxis has been estimated to account for 0.5% of all emergency department visits and up to one‐third of all otolaryngology‐related emergency department encounters. Inpatient hospitalization for aggressive treatment of severe nosebleeds has been reported in 0.2% of patients with nosebleeds.Purpose: The primary purpose of this multidisciplinary guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities in the management of nosebleeds and to create clear and actionable recommendations to implement these opportunities in clinical practice. Specific goals of this guideline are to promote best practices, reduce unjustified variations in care of patients with nosebleeds, improve health outcomes, and minimize the potential harms of nosebleeds or interventions to treat nosebleeds.The target patient for the guideline is any individual aged ≥3 years with a nosebleed or history of nosebleed who needs medical treatment or seeks medical advice. The target audience of this guideline is clinicians who evaluate and treat patients with nosebleed. This includes primary care providers such as family medicine physicians, internists, pediatricians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners. It also includes specialists such as emergency medicine providers, otolaryngologists, interventional radiologists/neuroradiologists and neurointerventionalists, hematologists, and cardiologists. The setting for this guideline includes any site of evaluation and treatment for a patient with nosebleed, including ambulatory medical sites, the emergency department, the inpatient hospital, and even remote outpatient encounters with phone calls and telemedicine. Outcomes to be considered for patients with nosebleed include control of acute bleeding, prevention of recurrent episodes of nasal bleeding, complications of treatment modalities, and accuracy of diagnostic measures.This guideline addresses the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of nosebleed. It focuses on nosebleeds that commonly present to clinicians via phone calls, office visits, and emergency room encounters. This guideline discusses first‐line treatments such as nasal compression, application of vasoconstrictors, nasal packing, and nasal cautery. It also addresses more complex epistaxis management, which includes the use of endoscopic arterial ligation and interventional radiology procedures. Management options for 2 special groups of patients—patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome and patients taking medications that inhibit coagulation and/or platelet function—are included in this guideline.This guideline is intended to focus on evidence‐based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group. It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide for managing patients with nosebleed. In this context, the purpose is to define useful actions for clinicians, generalists, and specialists from a variety of disciplines to improve quality of care. Conversely, the statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients.Action Statements: The guideline development group made recommendations for the following key action statements: (1) At the time of initial contact, the clinician should distinguish the nosebleed patient who requires prompt management from the patient who does not. (2) The clinician should treat active bleeding for patients in need of prompt management with firm sustained compression to the lower third of the nose, with or without the assistance of the patient or caregiver, for 5 minutes or longer. (3a) For patients in whom bleeding precludes identification of a bleeding site despite nasal compression, the clinician should treat ongoing active bleeding with nasal packing. (3b) The clinician should use resorbable packing for patients with a suspected bleeding disorder or for patients who are using anticoagulation or antiplatelet medications. (4) The clinician should educate the patient who undergoes nasal packing about the type of packing placed, timing of and plan for removal of packing (if not resorbable), postprocedure care, and any signs or symptoms that would warrant prompt reassessment. (5) The clinician should document factors that increase the frequency or severity of bleeding for any patient with a nosebleed, including personal or family history of bleeding disorders, use of anticoagulant or antiplatelet medications, or intranasal drug use. (6) The clinician should perform anterior rhinoscopy to identify a source of bleeding after removal of any blood clot (if present) for patients with nosebleeds. (7a) The clinician should perform, or should refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to identify the site of bleeding and guide further management in patients with recurrent nasal bleeding, despite prior treatment with packing or cautery, or with recurrent unilateral nasal bleeding. (8) The clinician should treat patients with an identified site of bleeding with an appropriate intervention, which may include one or more of the following: topical vasoconstrictors, nasal cautery, and moisturizing or lubricating agents. (9) When nasal cautery is chosen for treatment, the clinician should anesthetize the bleeding site and restrict application of cautery only to the active or suspected site(s) of bleeding. (10) The clinician should evaluate, or refer to a clinician who can evaluate, candidacy for surgical arterial ligation or endovascular embolization for patients with persistent or recurrent bleeding not controlled by packing or nasal cauterization. (11) In the absence of life‐threatening bleeding, the clinician should initiate first‐line treatments prior to transfusion, reversal of anticoagulation, or withdrawal of anticoagulation/antiplatelet medications for patients using these medications. (12) The clinician should assess, or refer to a specialist who can assess, the presence of nasal telangiectasias and/or oral mucosal telangiectasias in patients who have a history of recurrent bilateral nosebleeds or a family history of recurrent nosebleeds to diagnose hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome. (13) The clinician should educate patients with nosebleeds and their caregivers about preventive measures for nosebleeds, home treatment for nosebleeds, and indications to seek additional medical care. (14) The clinician or designee should document the outcome of intervention within 30 days or document transition of care in patients who had a nosebleed treated with nonresorbable packing, surgery, or arterial ligation/embolization.The policy level for the following recommendation, about examination of the nasal cavity and nasopharynx using nasal endoscopy, was an option: (7b) The clinician may perform, or may refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to examine the nasal cavity and nasopharynx in patients with epistaxis that is difficult to control or when there is concern for unrecognized pathology contributing to epistaxis.
- 7 January 2020
- Published by Wiley in Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery
- Vol. 162 (S1) , S1-S38
Top Cited PapersOpen AccessClinical Practice Guideline: Nosebleed (Epistaxis)
Objective: Nosebleed, also known as epistaxis, is a common problem that occurs at some point in at least 60% of people in the United States. While the majority of nosebleeds are limited in severity and duration, about 6% of people who experience nosebleeds will seek medical attention. For the purposes of this guideline, we define the target patient with a nosebleed as a patient with bleeding from the nostril, nasal cavity, or nasopharynx that is sufficient to warrant medical advice or care. This includes bleeding that is severe, persistent, and/or recurrent, as well as bleeding that impacts a patient’s quality of life. Interventions for nosebleeds range from self‐treatment and home remedies to more intensive procedural interventions in medical offices, emergency departments, hospitals, and operating rooms. Epistaxis has been estimated to account for 0.5% of all emergency department visits and up to one‐third of all otolaryngology‐related emergency department encounters. Inpatient hospitalization for aggressive treatment of severe nosebleeds has been reported in 0.2% of patients with nosebleeds.Purpose: The primary purpose of this multidisciplinary guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities in the management of nosebleeds and to create clear and actionable recommendations to implement these opportunities in clinical practice. Specific goals of this guideline are to promote best practices, reduce unjustified variations in care of patients with nosebleeds, improve health outcomes, and minimize the potential harms of nosebleeds or interventions to treat nosebleeds.The target patient for the guideline is any individual aged ≥3 years with a nosebleed or history of nosebleed who needs medical treatment or seeks medical advice. The target audience of this guideline is clinicians who evaluate and treat patients with nosebleed. This includes primary care providers such as family medicine physicians, internists, pediatricians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners. It also includes specialists such as emergency medicine providers, otolaryngologists, interventional radiologists/neuroradiologists and neurointerventionalists, hematologists, and cardiologists. The setting for this guideline includes any site of evaluation and treatment for a patient with nosebleed, including ambulatory medical sites, the emergency department, the inpatient hospital, and even remote outpatient encounters with phone calls and telemedicine. Outcomes to be considered for patients with nosebleed include control of acute bleeding, prevention of recurrent episodes of nasal bleeding, complications of treatment modalities, and accuracy of diagnostic measures.This guideline addresses the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of nosebleed. It focuses on nosebleeds that commonly present to clinicians via phone calls, office visits, and emergency room encounters. This guideline discusses first‐line treatments such as nasal compression, application of vasoconstrictors, nasal packing, and nasal cautery. It also addresses more complex epistaxis management, which includes the use of endoscopic arterial ligation and interventional radiology procedures. Management options for 2 special groups of patients—patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome and patients taking medications that inhibit coagulation and/or platelet function—are included in this guideline.This guideline is intended to focus on evidence‐based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group. It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide for managing patients with nosebleed. In this context, the purpose is to define useful actions for clinicians, generalists, and specialists from a variety of disciplines to improve quality of care. Conversely, the statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients.Action Statements: The guideline development group made recommendations for the following key action statements: (1) At the time of initial contact, the clinician should distinguish the nosebleed patient who requires prompt management from the patient who does not. (2) The clinician should treat active bleeding for patients in need of prompt management with firm sustained compression to the lower third of the nose, with or without the assistance of the patient or caregiver, for 5 minutes or longer. (3a) For patients in whom bleeding precludes identification of a bleeding site despite nasal compression, the clinician should treat ongoing active bleeding with nasal packing. (3b) The clinician should use resorbable packing for patients with a suspected bleeding disorder or for patients who are using anticoagulation or antiplatelet medications. (4) The clinician should educate the patient who undergoes nasal packing about the type of packing placed, timing of and plan for removal of packing (if not resorbable), postprocedure care, and any signs or symptoms that would warrant prompt reassessment. (5) The clinician should document factors that increase the frequency or severity of bleeding for any patient with a nosebleed, including personal or family history of bleeding disorders, use of anticoagulant or antiplatelet medications, or intranasal drug use. (6) The clinician should perform anterior rhinoscopy to identify a source of bleeding after removal of any blood clot (if present) for patients with nosebleeds. (7a) The clinician should perform, or should refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to identify the site of bleeding and guide further management in patients with recurrent nasal bleeding, despite prior treatment with packing or cautery, or with recurrent unilateral nasal bleeding. (8) The clinician should treat patients with an identified site of bleeding with an appropriate intervention, which may include one or more of the following: topical vasoconstrictors, nasal cautery, and moisturizing or lubricating agents. (9) When nasal cautery is chosen for treatment, the clinician should anesthetize the bleeding site and restrict application of cautery only to the active or suspected site(s) of bleeding. (10) The clinician should evaluate, or refer to a clinician who can evaluate, candidacy for surgical arterial ligation or endovascular embolization for patients with persistent or recurrent bleeding not controlled by packing or nasal cauterization. (11) In the absence of life‐threatening bleeding, the clinician should initiate first‐line treatments prior to transfusion, reversal of anticoagulation, or withdrawal of anticoagulation/antiplatelet medications for patients using these medications. (12) The clinician should assess, or refer to a specialist who can assess, the presence of nasal telangiectasias and/or oral mucosal telangiectasias in patients who have a history of recurrent bilateral nosebleeds or a family history of recurrent nosebleeds to diagnose hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome. (13) The clinician should educate patients with nosebleeds and their caregivers about preventive measures for nosebleeds, home treatment for nosebleeds, and indications to seek additional medical care. (14) The clinician or designee should document the outcome of intervention within 30 days or document transition of care in patients who had a nosebleed treated with nonresorbable packing, surgery, or arterial ligation/embolization.The policy level for the following recommendation, about examination of the nasal cavity and nasopharynx using nasal endoscopy, was an option: (7b) The clinician may perform, or may refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to examine the nasal cavity and nasopharynx in patients with epistaxis that is difficult to control or when there is concern for unrecognized pathology contributing to epistaxis.
- Open Access
- 7 January 2020
- Published by Wiley in Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery
- Vol. 162 (1) , 8-25
Clinical Practice Guideline: Nosebleed (Epistaxis) Executive Summary
Objective: Nosebleed, also known as epistaxis, is a common problem that occurs at some point in at least 60% of people in the United States. While the great majority of nosebleeds are limited in severity and duration, about 6% of people who experience nosebleeds will seek medical attention. For the purposes of this guideline, we define the target patient with a nosebleed as a patient with bleeding from the nostril, nasal cavity, or nasopharynx that is sufficient to warrant medical advice or care. This includes bleeding that is severe, persistent, and/or recurrent, as well as bleeding that impacts a patient’s quality of life. Interventions for nosebleeds range from self‐treatment and home remedies to more intensive procedural interventions in medical offices, emergency departments, hospitals, and operating rooms. Epistaxis has been estimated to account for 0.5% of all emergency department visits and up to one‐third of all otolaryngology‐related emergency department encounters. Inpatient hospitalization for aggressive treatment of severe nosebleeds has been reported in 0.2% of patients with nosebleeds.Purpose: The primary purpose of this multidisciplinary guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities in the management of nosebleeds and to create clear and actionable recommendations to implement these opportunities in clinical practice. Specific goals of this guideline are to promote best practices, reduce unjustified variations in care of patients with nosebleeds, improve health outcomes, and minimize the potential harms of nosebleeds or interventions to treat nosebleeds.The target patient for the guideline is any individual aged ≥3 years with a nosebleed or history of nosebleed who needs medical treatment or seeks medical advice. The target audience of this guideline is clinicians who evaluate and treat patients with nosebleed. This includes primary care providers such as family medicine physicians, internists, pediatricians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners. It also includes specialists such as emergency medicine providers, otolaryngologists, interventional radiologists/neuroradiologists and neurointerventionalists, hematologists, and cardiologists. The setting for this guideline includes any site of evaluation and treatment for a patient with nosebleed, including ambulatory medical sites, the emergency department, the inpatient hospital, and even remote outpatient encounters with phone calls and telemedicine. Outcomes to be considered for patients with nosebleed include control of acute bleeding, prevention of recurrent episodes of nasal bleeding, complications of treatment modalities, and accuracy of diagnostic measures.This guideline addresses the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of nosebleed. It will focus on nosebleeds that commonly present to clinicians with phone calls, office visits, and emergency room encounters. This guideline discusses first‐line treatments such as nasal compression, application of vasoconstrictors, nasal packing, and nasal cautery. It also addresses more complex epistaxis management, which includes the use of endoscopic arterial ligation and interventional radiology procedures. Management options for 2 special groups of patients, patients with hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome (HHT) and patients taking medications that inhibit coagulation and/or platelet function, are included in this guideline.This guideline is intended to focus on evidence‐based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the working group. It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide for managing patients with nosebleed. In this context, the purpose is to define useful actions for clinicians, generalists, and specialists from a variety of disciplines to improve quality of care. Conversely, the statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based upon their experience and assessment of individual patients.Action Statements: The guideline development group made recommendations for the following key action statements: (1) At the time of initial contact, the clinician should distinguish the nosebleed patient who requires prompt management from the patient who does not. (2) The clinician should treat active bleeding for patients in need of prompt management with firm sustained compression to the lower third of the nose, with or without the assistance of the patient or caregiver, for 5 minutes or longer. (3a) For patients in whom bleeding precludes identification of a bleeding site despite nasal compression, the clinician should treat ongoing active bleeding with nasal packing. (3b) The clinician should use resorbable packing for patients with a suspected bleeding disorder or for patients who are using anticoagulation or antiplatelet medications. (4) The clinician should educate the patient who undergoes nasal packing about the type of packing placed, timing of and plan for removal of packing (if not resorbable), postprocedure care, and any signs or symptoms that would warrant prompt reassessment. (5) The clinician should document factors that increase the frequency or severity of bleeding for any patient with a nosebleed, including personal or family history of bleeding disorders, use of anticoagulant or antiplatelet medications, or intranasal drug use. (6) The clinician should perform anterior rhinoscopy to identify a source of bleeding after removal of any blood clot (if present) for patients with nosebleeds. (7a) The clinician should perform, or should refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to identify the site of bleeding and guide further management in patients with recurrent nasal bleeding, despite prior treatment with packing or cautery, or with recurrent unilateral nasal bleeding. (8) The clinician should treat patients with an identified site of bleeding with an appropriate intervention, which may include 1 or more of the following: topical vasoconstrictors, nasal cautery, and moisturizing or lubricating agents. (9) When nasal cautery is chosen for treatment, the clinician should anesthetize the bleeding site and restrict application of cautery only to the active or suspected site(s) of bleeding. (10) The clinician should evaluate, or refer to a clinician who can evaluate, candidacy for surgical arterial ligation or endovascular embolization for patients with persistent or recurrent bleeding not controlled by packing or nasal cauterization. (11) In the absence of life‐threatening bleeding, the clinician should initiate first‐line treatments prior to transfusion, reversal of anticoagulation, or withdrawal of anticoagulation/antiplatelet medications for patients using these medications. (12) The clinician should assess, or refer to a specialist who can assess, the presence of nasal telangiectasias and/or oral mucosal telangiectasias in patients who have a history of recurrent bilateral nosebleeds or a family history of recurrent nosebleeds to diagnose hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome (HHT). (13) The clinician should educate patients with nosebleeds and their caregivers about preventive measures for nosebleeds, home treatment for nosebleeds, and indications to seek additional medical care. (14) The clinician or designee should document the outcome of intervention within 30 days or document transition of care in patients who had a nosebleed treated with nonresorbable packing, surgery, or arterial ligation/embolization.The policy level for the following recommendation about examination of the nasal cavity and nasopharynx using nasal endoscopy was an option: (7b) The clinician may perform, or may refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to examine the nasal cavity and nasopharynx in patients with epistaxis that is difficult to control or when there is concern for unrecognized pathology contributing to epistaxis.
- 7 January 2020
- Published by Wiley in Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery
- Vol. 162 (1) , 8-25
Open AccessClinical Practice Guideline: Nosebleed (Epistaxis) Executive Summary
Objective: Nosebleed, also known as epistaxis, is a common problem that occurs at some point in at least 60% of people in the United States. While the great majority of nosebleeds are limited in severity and duration, about 6% of people who experience nosebleeds will seek medical attention. For the purposes of this guideline, we define the target patient with a nosebleed as a patient with bleeding from the nostril, nasal cavity, or nasopharynx that is sufficient to warrant medical advice or care. This includes bleeding that is severe, persistent, and/or recurrent, as well as bleeding that impacts a patient’s quality of life. Interventions for nosebleeds range from self‐treatment and home remedies to more intensive procedural interventions in medical offices, emergency departments, hospitals, and operating rooms. Epistaxis has been estimated to account for 0.5% of all emergency department visits and up to one‐third of all otolaryngology‐related emergency department encounters. Inpatient hospitalization for aggressive treatment of severe nosebleeds has been reported in 0.2% of patients with nosebleeds.Purpose: The primary purpose of this multidisciplinary guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities in the management of nosebleeds and to create clear and actionable recommendations to implement these opportunities in clinical practice. Specific goals of this guideline are to promote best practices, reduce unjustified variations in care of patients with nosebleeds, improve health outcomes, and minimize the potential harms of nosebleeds or interventions to treat nosebleeds.The target patient for the guideline is any individual aged ≥3 years with a nosebleed or history of nosebleed who needs medical treatment or seeks medical advice. The target audience of this guideline is clinicians who evaluate and treat patients with nosebleed. This includes primary care providers such as family medicine physicians, internists, pediatricians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners. It also includes specialists such as emergency medicine providers, otolaryngologists, interventional radiologists/neuroradiologists and neurointerventionalists, hematologists, and cardiologists. The setting for this guideline includes any site of evaluation and treatment for a patient with nosebleed, including ambulatory medical sites, the emergency department, the inpatient hospital, and even remote outpatient encounters with phone calls and telemedicine. Outcomes to be considered for patients with nosebleed include control of acute bleeding, prevention of recurrent episodes of nasal bleeding, complications of treatment modalities, and accuracy of diagnostic measures.This guideline addresses the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of nosebleed. It will focus on nosebleeds that commonly present to clinicians with phone calls, office visits, and emergency room encounters. This guideline discusses first‐line treatments such as nasal compression, application of vasoconstrictors, nasal packing, and nasal cautery. It also addresses more complex epistaxis management, which includes the use of endoscopic arterial ligation and interventional radiology procedures. Management options for 2 special groups of patients, patients with hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome (HHT) and patients taking medications that inhibit coagulation and/or platelet function, are included in this guideline.This guideline is intended to focus on evidence‐based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the working group. It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide for managing patients with nosebleed. In this context, the purpose is to define useful actions for clinicians, generalists, and specialists from a variety of disciplines to improve quality of care. Conversely, the statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based upon their experience and assessment of individual patients.Action Statements: The guideline development group made recommendations for the following key action statements: (1) At the time of initial contact, the clinician should distinguish the nosebleed patient who requires prompt management from the patient who does not. (2) The clinician should treat active bleeding for patients in need of prompt management with firm sustained compression to the lower third of the nose, with or without the assistance of the patient or caregiver, for 5 minutes or longer. (3a) For patients in whom bleeding precludes identification of a bleeding site despite nasal compression, the clinician should treat ongoing active bleeding with nasal packing. (3b) The clinician should use resorbable packing for patients with a suspected bleeding disorder or for patients who are using anticoagulation or antiplatelet medications. (4) The clinician should educate the patient who undergoes nasal packing about the type of packing placed, timing of and plan for removal of packing (if not resorbable), postprocedure care, and any signs or symptoms that would warrant prompt reassessment. (5) The clinician should document factors that increase the frequency or severity of bleeding for any patient with a nosebleed, including personal or family history of bleeding disorders, use of anticoagulant or antiplatelet medications, or intranasal drug use. (6) The clinician should perform anterior rhinoscopy to identify a source of bleeding after removal of any blood clot (if present) for patients with nosebleeds. (7a) The clinician should perform, or should refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to identify the site of bleeding and guide further management in patients with recurrent nasal bleeding, despite prior treatment with packing or cautery, or with recurrent unilateral nasal bleeding. (8) The clinician should treat patients with an identified site of bleeding with an appropriate intervention, which may include 1 or more of the following: topical vasoconstrictors, nasal cautery, and moisturizing or lubricating agents. (9) When nasal cautery is chosen for treatment, the clinician should anesthetize the bleeding site and restrict application of cautery only to the active or suspected site(s) of bleeding. (10) The clinician should evaluate, or refer to a clinician who can evaluate, candidacy for surgical arterial ligation or endovascular embolization for patients with persistent or recurrent bleeding not controlled by packing or nasal cauterization. (11) In the absence of life‐threatening bleeding, the clinician should initiate first‐line treatments prior to transfusion, reversal of anticoagulation, or withdrawal of anticoagulation/antiplatelet medications for patients using these medications. (12) The clinician should assess, or refer to a specialist who can assess, the presence of nasal telangiectasias and/or oral mucosal telangiectasias in patients who have a history of recurrent bilateral nosebleeds or a family history of recurrent nosebleeds to diagnose hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia syndrome (HHT). (13) The clinician should educate patients with nosebleeds and their caregivers about preventive measures for nosebleeds, home treatment for nosebleeds, and indications to seek additional medical care. (14) The clinician or designee should document the outcome of intervention within 30 days or document transition of care in patients who had a nosebleed treated with nonresorbable packing, surgery, or arterial ligation/embolization.The policy level for the following recommendation about examination of the nasal cavity and nasopharynx using nasal endoscopy was an option: (7b) The clinician may perform, or may refer to a clinician who can perform, nasal endoscopy to examine the nasal cavity and nasopharynx in patients with epistaxis that is difficult to control or when there is concern for unrecognized pathology contributing to epistaxis.
- 1 August 2019
- Published by Elsevier in Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology
- Vol. 123 (2) , 186-192.e9
Association between early-childhood antibiotic exposure and subsequent asthma in the US Medicaid population
- 1 August 2019
- Published by Elsevier in Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology
- Vol. 123 (2) , 186-192.e9
Association between early-childhood antibiotic exposure and subsequent asthma in the US Medicaid population
- 1 December 2018
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal
- Vol. 37 (12) , 1248-1254
Variation in Outpatient Antibiotic Dispensing for Respiratory Infections in Children by Clinician Specialty and Treatment Setting
Background: Antibiotics are commonly prescribed for children with acute respiratory infections (ARIs). This study describes the distribution of ARI diagnoses and specifically quantifies antibiotic dispensing for bronchitis and upper respiratory infection (URI) by treatment setting and specialty. Methods: This retrospective, observational cross-sectional study used data from the HealthCore Integrated Research Environment containing claims from 14 commercial health plans for 2012 to 2014. Children (2–17 years) with first-episode ARI were identified by diagnosis of acute otitis media (AOM), sinusitis, pharyngitis, bronchitis or URI with no competing infections or chronic illnesses. Treatment setting was where diagnoses were made: primary care offices, urgent care centers (UCC), retail health clinics (RHCs) or emergency departments. Primary outcome measure was antibiotic prescription fills from pharmacies within 2 days of start of ARI episode. Results: For URI, the highest proportions in antibiotic dispensing were ordered by office-based or UCC family physicians (28% and 30%, respectively) and office-based or UCC nurse practitioners/physician assistants (30% and 29%, respectively). Across all settings and specialties, there was high proportion of antibiotic dispensing for bronchitis (75%). Overall, 48% of 544,531 children diagnosed with ARI filled antibiotics. Nurse practitioners/physician assistants in RHC made the most diagnoses of AOM (24%) and streptococcal pharyngitis (22%). Conclusions: Outreach efforts to decrease antibiotic dispensing for URI can be focused on office-based and UCC family physicians and nurse practitioners/physician assistants. All specialties need widespread interventions to reduce antibiotic dispensing for bronchitis. RHC nurse practitioners/physician assistants can be targeted to reduce high proportion of AOM and streptococcal pharyngitis diagnoses.
- 1 December 2018
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal
- Vol. 37 (12) , 1248-1254
Variation in Outpatient Antibiotic Dispensing for Respiratory Infections in Children by Clinician Specialty and Treatment Setting
Background: Antibiotics are commonly prescribed for children with acute respiratory infections (ARIs). This study describes the distribution of ARI diagnoses and specifically quantifies antibiotic dispensing for bronchitis and upper respiratory infection (URI) by treatment setting and specialty. Methods: This retrospective, observational cross-sectional study used data from the HealthCore Integrated Research Environment containing claims from 14 commercial health plans for 2012 to 2014. Children (2–17 years) with first-episode ARI were identified by diagnosis of acute otitis media (AOM), sinusitis, pharyngitis, bronchitis or URI with no competing infections or chronic illnesses. Treatment setting was where diagnoses were made: primary care offices, urgent care centers (UCC), retail health clinics (RHCs) or emergency departments. Primary outcome measure was antibiotic prescription fills from pharmacies within 2 days of start of ARI episode. Results: For URI, the highest proportions in antibiotic dispensing were ordered by office-based or UCC family physicians (28% and 30%, respectively) and office-based or UCC nurse practitioners/physician assistants (30% and 29%, respectively). Across all settings and specialties, there was high proportion of antibiotic dispensing for bronchitis (75%). Overall, 48% of 544,531 children diagnosed with ARI filled antibiotics. Nurse practitioners/physician assistants in RHC made the most diagnoses of AOM (24%) and streptococcal pharyngitis (22%). Conclusions: Outreach efforts to decrease antibiotic dispensing for URI can be focused on office-based and UCC family physicians and nurse practitioners/physician assistants. All specialties need widespread interventions to reduce antibiotic dispensing for bronchitis. RHC nurse practitioners/physician assistants can be targeted to reduce high proportion of AOM and streptococcal pharyngitis diagnoses.
- 1 September 2018
- Published by SLACK, Inc. in Pediatric Annals
- Vol. 47 (9) , e366-e370
Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy in Clinical Practice
Vaccines have had a profound impact on public health; however, parents are increasingly refusing or delaying vaccines for their children. Population-based studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of vaccines. Pediatricians should be well informed about vaccine development, safety, and efficacy to inspire parental confidence in vaccines. Systemic challenges in discussing and providing immunizations exist. Discussions about immunizations may be lengthy and time spent discussing immunizations is not routinely reimbursed. Adolescents may be inadequately immunized because they do not routinely present for preventive health visits. Routine immunizations should be offered and discussed at sick visits, particularly for adolescents. Improving immunization rates requires a multifaceted approach.
- 1 September 2018
- Published by SLACK, Inc. in Pediatric Annals
- Vol. 47 (9) , e366-e370
Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy in Clinical Practice
Vaccines have had a profound impact on public health; however, parents are increasingly refusing or delaying vaccines for their children. Population-based studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of vaccines. Pediatricians should be well informed about vaccine development, safety, and efficacy to inspire parental confidence in vaccines. Systemic challenges in discussing and providing immunizations exist. Discussions about immunizations may be lengthy and time spent discussing immunizations is not routinely reimbursed. Adolescents may be inadequately immunized because they do not routinely present for preventive health visits. Routine immunizations should be offered and discussed at sick visits, particularly for adolescents. Improving immunization rates requires a multifaceted approach.
- Top Cited Papers
- 1 September 2017
- Published by American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in Pediatrics
- Vol. 140 (3) , e20172151
Age Limit of Pediatrics
This Policy Statement was reaffirmed April 2023.: Pediatrics is a multifaceted specialty that encompasses children’s physical, psychosocial, developmental, and mental health. Pediatric care may begin periconceptionally and continues through gestation, infancy, childhood, adolescence, and young adulthood. Although adolescence and young adulthood are recognizable phases of life, an upper age limit is not easily demarcated and varies depending on the individual patient. The establishment of arbitrary age limits on pediatric care by health care providers should be discouraged. The decision to continue care with a pediatrician or pediatric medical or surgical subspecialist should be made solely by the patient (and family, when appropriate) and the physician and must take into account the physical and psychosocial needs of the patient and the abilities of the pediatric provider to meet these needs.
- 1 September 2017
- Published by American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in Pediatrics
- Vol. 140 (3) , e20172151
Top Cited PapersAge Limit of Pediatrics
This Policy Statement was reaffirmed April 2023.: Pediatrics is a multifaceted specialty that encompasses children’s physical, psychosocial, developmental, and mental health. Pediatric care may begin periconceptionally and continues through gestation, infancy, childhood, adolescence, and young adulthood. Although adolescence and young adulthood are recognizable phases of life, an upper age limit is not easily demarcated and varies depending on the individual patient. The establishment of arbitrary age limits on pediatric care by health care providers should be discouraged. The decision to continue care with a pediatrician or pediatric medical or surgical subspecialist should be made solely by the patient (and family, when appropriate) and the physician and must take into account the physical and psychosocial needs of the patient and the abilities of the pediatric provider to meet these needs.
- Open Access
- 3 January 2017
- Published by Wiley in Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery
- Vol. 156 (1) , 14-29
Clinical Practice Guideline (Update): Earwax (Cerumen Impaction) Executive Summary
The American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO‐HNSF) has published a supplement to this issue of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery featuring the updated Clinical Practice Guideline: Earwax (Cerumen Impaction). To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 11 recommendations emphasize proper ear hygiene, diagnosis of cerumen impaction, factors that modify management, evaluating the need for intervention, and proper treatment. An updated guideline is needed due to new evidence (3 guidelines, 5 systematic reviews, and 6 randomized controlled trials) and the need to add statements on managing cerumen impaction that focus on primary prevention, contraindicated intervention, and referral and coordination of care.
- 3 January 2017
- Published by Wiley in Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery
- Vol. 156 (1) , 14-29
Open AccessClinical Practice Guideline (Update): Earwax (Cerumen Impaction) Executive Summary
The American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO‐HNSF) has published a supplement to this issue of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery featuring the updated Clinical Practice Guideline: Earwax (Cerumen Impaction). To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 11 recommendations emphasize proper ear hygiene, diagnosis of cerumen impaction, factors that modify management, evaluating the need for intervention, and proper treatment. An updated guideline is needed due to new evidence (3 guidelines, 5 systematic reviews, and 6 randomized controlled trials) and the need to add statements on managing cerumen impaction that focus on primary prevention, contraindicated intervention, and referral and coordination of care.
- Open Access
- 3 January 2017
- Published by Wiley in Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery
- Vol. 156 (S1) , S1-S29
Clinical Practice Guideline (Update): Earwax (Cerumen Impaction)
Objective: This update of the 2008 American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation cerumen impaction clinical practice guideline provides evidence‐based recommendations on managing cerumen impaction. Cerumen impaction is defined as an accumulation of cerumen that causes symptoms, prevents assessment of the ear, or both. Changes from the prior guideline include a consumer added to the development group; new evidence (3 guidelines, 5 systematic reviews, and 6 randomized controlled trials); enhanced information on patient education and counseling; a new algorithm to clarify action statement relationships; expanded action statement profiles to explicitly state quality improvement opportunities, confidence in the evidence, intentional vagueness, and differences of opinion; an enhanced external review process to include public comment and journal peer review; and 3 new key action statements on managing cerumen impaction that focus on primary prevention, contraindicated intervention, and referral and coordination of care. Purpose: The primary purpose of this guideline is to help clinicians identify patients with cerumen impaction who may benefit from intervention and to promote evidence‐based management. Another purpose of the guideline is to highlight needs and management options in special populations or in patients who have modifying factors. The guideline is intended for all clinicians who are likely to diagnose and manage patients with cerumen impaction, and it applies to any setting in which cerumen impaction would be identified, monitored, or managed. The guideline does not apply to patients with cerumen impaction associated with the following conditions: dermatologic diseases of the ear canal; recurrent otitis externa; keratosis obturans; prior radiation therapy affecting the ear; previous tympanoplasty/myringoplasty, canal wall down mastoidectomy, or other surgery affecting the ear canal.Key Action Statements: The panel made a strong recommendation that clinicians should treat, or refer to a clinician who can treat, cerumen impaction, defined as an accumulation of cerumen that is associated with symptoms, prevents needed assessment of the ear, or both.The panel made the following recommendations: (1) Clinicians should explain proper ear hygiene to prevent cerumen impaction when patients have an accumulation of cerumen. (2) Clinicians should diagnose cerumen impaction when an accumulation of cerumen, as seen on otoscopy, is associated with symptoms, prevents needed assessment of the ear, or both. (3) Clinicians should assess the patient with cerumen impaction by history and/or physical examination for factors that modify management, such as ≥1 of the following: anticoagulant therapy, immunocompromised state, diabetes mellitus, prior radiation therapy to the head and neck, ear canal stenosis, exostoses, and nonintact tympanic membrane. (4) Clinicians should not routinely treat cerumen in patients who are asymptomatic and whose ears can be adequately examined. (5) Clinicians should identify patients with obstructing cerumen in the ear canal who may not be able to express symptoms (young children and cognitively impaired children and adults), and they should promptly evaluate the need for intervention. (6) Clinicians should perform otoscopy to detect the presence of cerumen in patients with hearing aids during a health care encounter. (7) Clinicians should treat, or refer to a clinician who can treat, the patient with cerumen impaction with an appropriate intervention, which may include ≥1 of the following: cerumenolytic agents, irrigation, or manual removal requiring instrumentation. (8) Clinicians should recommend against ear candling for treating or preventing cerumen impaction. (9) Clinicians should assess patients at the conclusion of in‐office treatment of cerumen impaction and document the resolution of impaction. If the impaction is not resolved, the clinician should use additional treatment. If full or partial symptoms persist despite resolution of impaction, the clinician should evaluate the patient for alternative diagnoses. (10) Finally, if initial management is unsuccessful, clinicians should refer patients with persistent cerumen impaction to clinicians who have specialized equipment and training to clean and evaluate ear canals and tympanic membranes.The panel offered the following as options: (1) Clinicians may use cerumenolytic agents (including water or saline solution) in the management of cerumen impaction. (2) Clinicians may use irrigation in the management of cerumen impaction. (3) Clinicians may use manual removal requiring instrumentation in the management of cerumen impaction. (4) Last, clinicians may educate/counsel patients with cerumen impaction or excessive cerumen regarding control measures.
- 3 January 2017
- Published by Wiley in Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery
- Vol. 156 (S1) , S1-S29
Open AccessClinical Practice Guideline (Update): Earwax (Cerumen Impaction)
Objective: This update of the 2008 American Academy of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery Foundation cerumen impaction clinical practice guideline provides evidence‐based recommendations on managing cerumen impaction. Cerumen impaction is defined as an accumulation of cerumen that causes symptoms, prevents assessment of the ear, or both. Changes from the prior guideline include a consumer added to the development group; new evidence (3 guidelines, 5 systematic reviews, and 6 randomized controlled trials); enhanced information on patient education and counseling; a new algorithm to clarify action statement relationships; expanded action statement profiles to explicitly state quality improvement opportunities, confidence in the evidence, intentional vagueness, and differences of opinion; an enhanced external review process to include public comment and journal peer review; and 3 new key action statements on managing cerumen impaction that focus on primary prevention, contraindicated intervention, and referral and coordination of care. Purpose: The primary purpose of this guideline is to help clinicians identify patients with cerumen impaction who may benefit from intervention and to promote evidence‐based management. Another purpose of the guideline is to highlight needs and management options in special populations or in patients who have modifying factors. The guideline is intended for all clinicians who are likely to diagnose and manage patients with cerumen impaction, and it applies to any setting in which cerumen impaction would be identified, monitored, or managed. The guideline does not apply to patients with cerumen impaction associated with the following conditions: dermatologic diseases of the ear canal; recurrent otitis externa; keratosis obturans; prior radiation therapy affecting the ear; previous tympanoplasty/myringoplasty, canal wall down mastoidectomy, or other surgery affecting the ear canal.Key Action Statements: The panel made a strong recommendation that clinicians should treat, or refer to a clinician who can treat, cerumen impaction, defined as an accumulation of cerumen that is associated with symptoms, prevents needed assessment of the ear, or both.The panel made the following recommendations: (1) Clinicians should explain proper ear hygiene to prevent cerumen impaction when patients have an accumulation of cerumen. (2) Clinicians should diagnose cerumen impaction when an accumulation of cerumen, as seen on otoscopy, is associated with symptoms, prevents needed assessment of the ear, or both. (3) Clinicians should assess the patient with cerumen impaction by history and/or physical examination for factors that modify management, such as ≥1 of the following: anticoagulant therapy, immunocompromised state, diabetes mellitus, prior radiation therapy to the head and neck, ear canal stenosis, exostoses, and nonintact tympanic membrane. (4) Clinicians should not routinely treat cerumen in patients who are asymptomatic and whose ears can be adequately examined. (5) Clinicians should identify patients with obstructing cerumen in the ear canal who may not be able to express symptoms (young children and cognitively impaired children and adults), and they should promptly evaluate the need for intervention. (6) Clinicians should perform otoscopy to detect the presence of cerumen in patients with hearing aids during a health care encounter. (7) Clinicians should treat, or refer to a clinician who can treat, the patient with cerumen impaction with an appropriate intervention, which may include ≥1 of the following: cerumenolytic agents, irrigation, or manual removal requiring instrumentation. (8) Clinicians should recommend against ear candling for treating or preventing cerumen impaction. (9) Clinicians should assess patients at the conclusion of in‐office treatment of cerumen impaction and document the resolution of impaction. If the impaction is not resolved, the clinician should use additional treatment. If full or partial symptoms persist despite resolution of impaction, the clinician should evaluate the patient for alternative diagnoses. (10) Finally, if initial management is unsuccessful, clinicians should refer patients with persistent cerumen impaction to clinicians who have specialized equipment and training to clean and evaluate ear canals and tympanic membranes.The panel offered the following as options: (1) Clinicians may use cerumenolytic agents (including water or saline solution) in the management of cerumen impaction. (2) Clinicians may use irrigation in the management of cerumen impaction. (3) Clinicians may use manual removal requiring instrumentation in the management of cerumen impaction. (4) Last, clinicians may educate/counsel patients with cerumen impaction or excessive cerumen regarding control measures.
- Top Cited PapersOpen Access
- 1 September 2016
- Published by American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in Pediatrics
- Vol. 138 (3) , e20162146
Countering Vaccine Hesitancy
This Clinical Report was revised. See https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2023-065483.: Immunizations have led to a significant decrease in rates of vaccine-preventable diseases and have made a significant impact on the health of children. However, some parents express concerns about vaccine safety and the necessity of vaccines. The concerns of parents range from hesitancy about some immunizations to refusal of all vaccines. This clinical report provides information about addressing parental concerns about vaccination.
- 1 September 2016
- Published by American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) in Pediatrics
- Vol. 138 (3) , e20162146
Top Cited PapersOpen AccessCountering Vaccine Hesitancy
This Clinical Report was revised. See https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2023-065483.: Immunizations have led to a significant decrease in rates of vaccine-preventable diseases and have made a significant impact on the health of children. However, some parents express concerns about vaccine safety and the necessity of vaccines. The concerns of parents range from hesitancy about some immunizations to refusal of all vaccines. This clinical report provides information about addressing parental concerns about vaccination.