Application of three-dimensional printing (3D) technology is relatively new in healthcare, but significant progress has been made over the last few decades. The technology has been evolved and became more accessible and affordable for the medical use. The aim of the review article is to discuss the potential use of 3D printing in otorhinolaryngology and head and neck surgery. In the article, use of this novel technology is discussed across various subspecialties in terms of skill training, surgical planning and development of customised prosthesis. Internet searching was also performed for the commercial utility of 3D printed devices in ENT patient care. 3D printing is a promising technology. Numerous articles have been published in the international literature on its potential use in healthcare and progress is being made regularly by researchers to expand its implications in ENT. However, shortage of suitable 3D material which simulate human tissues for developing better training models discloses area of further research. Integration of tissue engineering 3D bioprinting provides significant opportunity to develop functional 3D printed implant for postsurgical reconstruction and organ transplantation.
Objective Within otolaryngology, race is commonly included as a study covariate; however, its value in clinical practice is unclear. This study sought to explore how race and ethnicity have been used and applied over time in otolaryngology publications. Data Sources PubMed database. Review Methods A systematic review was done to identify original otolaryngology studies between January 1, 1946, and June 25, 2020, with the following search terms: “otolaryngology” AND “race” OR “ethnicity.” Results Of the 1984 yielded studies, 932 were included in the final analysis. Only 2 studies (0.2%) defined race, and 172 (18.5%) gave participants the opportunity to self-identify race. Less than half (n = 322, 43.8%) of studies controlled for confounders. One hundred studies (10.7%) linked race to genetic factors. An overall 564 (60.5%) made conclusions about race, and 232 (24.9%) mentioned that race is relevant for clinical decision making. The majority of studies had first and senior authors from high-income countries (93.9% and 93.8%, respectively). Over time, there was a significant increase in publications that controlled for confounders, the number of race categories used, and studies that highlighted disparities. Conclusion Race and ethnicity are often poorly defined in otolaryngology publications. Furthermore, publications do not always control for confounding variables or allow participants to self-identify race. On the basis of our findings, we suggest 7 foundational principles that can be used to promote equitable research in otolaryngology publications. Future efforts should focus on incorporating research guidelines for race and ethnicity into journal publication standards.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.