Background: Evaluation and interpretation of the literature on obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) allows for consolidation and determination of the key factors important for clinical management of the adult OSA patient. Toward this goal, an international collaborative of multidisciplinary experts in sleep apnea evaluation and treatment have produced the International Consensus statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea (ICS:OSA). Methods: Using previously defined methodology, focal topics in OSA were assigned as literature review (LR), evidence-based review (EBR), or evidencebased review with recommendations (EBR-R) formats. Each topic incorporated the available and relevant evidence which was summarized and graded on study quality. Each topic and section underwent iterative review and the ICS:OSA was created and reviewed by all authors for consensus. Results: The ICS:OSA addresses OSA syndrome definitions, pathophysiology, epidemiology, risk factors for disease, screening methods, diagnostic testing types, multiple treatment modalities, and effects of OSA treatment on multiple OSA-associated comorbidities. Specific focus on outcomes with positive airway pressure (PAP) and surgical treatments were evaluated. Conclusion:This review of the literature consolidates the available knowledge and identifies the limitations of the current evidence on OSA. This effort aims to create a resource for OSA evidence-based practice and identify future research needs. Knowledge gaps and research opportunities include improving the metrics of OSA disease, determining the optimal OSA screening paradigms, developing strategies for PAP adherence and longitudinal care, enhancing selection of PAP alternatives and surgery, understanding health risk outcomes, and translating evidence into individualized approaches to therapy.

No abstract

BackgroundPortable educational technologies, like simulators, afford students the opportunity to learn independently. A key question in education, is how to pair self-regulated learning (SRL) with direct instruction. A cloud-based portable otoscopy simulator was employed to compare two curricula involving SRL. Pre-clerkship medical students used a prototype smartphone application, a 3D ear attachment and an otoscope to complete either otoscopy curriculum.MethodsPre-clerkship medical students were recruited and randomized to two curriculum designs. The “Discovery then Instruction” group received the simulator one week before a traditional lecture, while the “Instruction then Discovery” group received it after the lecture. To assess participants’ ability to identify otoscopic pathology, we used a 100-item test at baseline, post-intervention and 2-week retention time points. Secondary outcomes included self-reported comfort, time spent using the device, and a survey on learning preferences.ResultsThirty-four students completed the study. Analysis of knowledge acquisition and retention showed improvement in scores of both groups and no significant effects of group (F1,31 = 0.53, p = 0.47). An analysis of participants’ self-reported comfort showed a significant group x test interaction (F1,36 = 4.61, p = 0.04), where only the discovery then instruction group’s comfort improved significantly. Overall device usage was low, as the discovery then instruction group spent 21.47 ± 26.28 min, while the instruction then discovery group spent 13.84 ± 18.71 min. The discovery first group’s time spent with the simulator correlated moderately with their post-test score (r = 0.42, p = 0.07). After the intervention, most participants in both groups (63–68%) stated that they would prefer the instruction then discovery sequence.ConclusionsBoth curricular sequences led to improved knowledge scores with no statistically significant knowledge differences. When given minimal guidance, students engaged in discovery learning minimally. There is value in SRL in simulation education, and we plan to further improve our curricular design by considering learner behaviours identified in this study.

Objective: This study examines the incidence and management of traumatic loss or osseointegration failure of percutaneous bone conduction implants in children. Study Design: Case series. Setting: Pediatric tertiary care institution. Patients: Children who underwent percutaneous osseointegrated implant placement from 1996 to 2016. Interventions: Clinical evaluation and revision surgery after implant loss. Main Outcome Measures: This study compares the characteristics of children who experienced traumatic loss of implant to those who did not to calculate odds ratios (ORs) describing the risk of injury and investigate device utilization after implant failure. Results: One hundred forty-seven children received percutaneous bone conduction devices; 129 were followed for at least 1 year. Trauma occurred in 19 of 129 cases (15%). Among children with traumatic injury, mean age at initial surgery was 5 years (SD = ±3.3), and 42% had a developmental delay. Among children without traumatic injury, mean age at initial surgery was 6.5 years (SD = ±4.4), and 28% had a developmental delay. Multivariate logistic regression found no significant differences in age, sex, or developmental delay associated with implant loss. In five of 19 traumatic cases (26%), the implant remained in situ due to either skull fracture or abutment loss. In the remaining 14 of 19 cases (74%), there was osseointegration failure with extrusion of the implant. Seventeen children underwent revision surgery utilizing previously placed “sleeper,” or backup, osseointegrated implant, and 14 (82%) of these continued to use their device. Two patients with extruded implants did not undergo revision surgery. Conclusion: Traumatic injury or osseointegration failure leads to loss of percutaneous bone conduction implants in approximately 15% of children. Revision surgery is often successful.

No abstract