Current Pediatric Tertiary Care Practices Following Adenotonsillectomy: An Update
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Adenotonsillectomy is a common procedure performed in children, and the practice patterns at academic centers have been evolving with the publication of updated societal guidelines. In this study, we assess perioperative practice patterns at tertiary care children's hospitals for children undergoing adenotonsillectomy. METHODS: A cross-sectional 18-question survey distributed in July of 2022 recruited responses through August 25, 2022. The division chiefs of 70 pediatric otolaryngology groups at tertiary care children's hospitals across the United States and Canada were surveyed. Division chiefs submitted survey responses on behalf of the group practice patterns for children undergoing adenotonsillectomy. The main measure was survey responses from the division chiefs of pediatric otolaryngology reporting group practice. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 46%. Eighty-eight percent of groups reported an official adenotonsillectomy admission policy. Commonly reported admission criteria included age (93%) and obesity (59%). Eighty-eight percent of groups defined severe obstructive sleep apnea as apnea-hypopnea index ≥10. Only 41% of groups required a child to be observed sleeping on room air prior to ambulatory discharge. Ninety-seven percent of groups reported routinely obtaining preoperative polysomnography in a variety of clinical settings. CONCLUSIONS: Many children's hospitals report an official admission policy following adenotonsillectomy. Despite a decade passing since the initial publication of the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery clinical practice guidelines, there remains great variability in the practice patterns for both preoperative polysomnography and postoperative monitoring and admission. These results highlight an opportunity for an improved unified approach to perioperative pediatric adenotonsillectomy practice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5 Laryngoscope, 134:2931-2936, 2024.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".