• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

How Standard Is “Standard of Care”?

by Jane Jerrard • July 1, 2006

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

Dr. Har-El said, “I was taught to just take [the mass] out—that that’s treating the patient. But I’ve seen more and more cases where there may be some exception. So now I ask for CT scan and needle biopsy.” Dr. Smith agreed: “Fine needle aspiration is used for everyone in our practice, pretty much. It’s our first diagnostic; it helps me decide whether the patient needs imaging or not.”

You Might Also Like

  • Proposed Vial Mixing Standard May Have Adverse Effects for Otolaryngologists
  • State-of-the-Art Techniques Are Tempting, but May Not Improve Care
  • Telehealth Care for HNC Cancer Survivors Compares Favorably to Standard Care in Certain Outcomes
  • Drop-In Clinics May Help with Patient Care-But Close Oversight is Necessary
Explore This Issue
July 2006

Next, Dr. Persky revealed the second phase of the case study: A fine needle aspiration (FNA) biopsy showed cellular pleomorphic adenoma, with possible low-grade mucoepidermoid carcinoma. What now?

Dr. Descher began: “I don’t know that every patient who has a mass removed needs the same treatment. I mean, do you trust the report if it comes from an outside pathologist? We have our own pathologist look at the results. We still have to consider that it may be malignant.” Dr. Persky’s response to this was, “It all depends on your experience. Do you believe imaging is necessary?” Dr. Donald agreed that pathology can be deceptive. “You’re often influenced by your last experience,” he mused. After a recent experience with questionable pathology, he said, “I’m more inclined to order CT scans now.”

Asked about concerns with FNA biopsies spreading disease, every member of the panel said they were not concerned.

Dr. Persky went on: The patient undergoes a CT scan, which shows the mass. It may be a benign tumor. The next issue in the standard of care: discussing the operation with the patient.

Standards for Discussion of Operation

The panel was asked how each would handle pre-operative topics including risks, complications, and sequella. Dr. Descher said, “I talk about what may be required, and the side effects of that. I quote national data on complications that occur. It’s critical to discuss handling the possibility of malignancy. As I was taught, everything you tell the patient before an operation is information; everything you tell them afterwards is an excuse.” He added, “I also tell them about my personal experience with similar cases, but I also warn them that that doesn’t mean they won’t have complications.”

Dr. Har-El said he covers sequella in detail in pre-operative discussions. “I tell them it’s not unusual to wake up with a numb ear lobe,” he said. “I cover side effects—and I do use the term ‘side effects’ rather than complications or sequella.”

Figure. Drs. Mark S. Persky, Paul Donald, Gady Har-El, Richard Smith, and Daniel Descher (left to right) discussed what constitutes a “standard of care” during a Triological Society panel discussion.

click for large version
Figure. Drs. Mark S. Persky, Paul Donald, Gady Har-El, Richard Smith, and Daniel Descher (left to right) discussed what constitutes a “standard of care” during a Triological Society panel discussion.

Dr. Smith said that his practice has simplified these discussions in the last few years. “We focus on scarring and malignancy risk,” he said, because these seem to be the two biggest concerns of patients. “Also, I tend to quote my own statistics [on patient complications] rather than the national data. I believe it’s more meaningful to them.”

Pages: 1 2 3 4 | Single Page

Filed Under: Departments, Health Policy, Medical Education, Practice Management Tagged With: CT, guidelines, medical education, patient communication, policy, Quality, standards, surgery, testing, treatmentIssue: July 2006

You Might Also Like:

  • Proposed Vial Mixing Standard May Have Adverse Effects for Otolaryngologists
  • State-of-the-Art Techniques Are Tempting, but May Not Improve Care
  • Telehealth Care for HNC Cancer Survivors Compares Favorably to Standard Care in Certain Outcomes
  • Drop-In Clinics May Help with Patient Care-But Close Oversight is Necessary

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Do you use AI-powered scribes for documentation?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • How to: Positioning for Middle Cranial Fossa Repair of Superior Semicircular Canal Dehiscence

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Endoscopic Ear Surgery: Advancements and Adoption Challenges 

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • The Importance of Time Away
    • Endoscopic Ear Surgery: Advancements and Adoption Challenges 
    • Reflections from a Past President of the Triological Society
    • ENT Surgeons Explore the Benefits and Challenges of AI-Powered Scribes: Revolutionizing Documentation in Healthcare
    • How To: Open Expansion Laryngoplasty for Combined Glottic and Subglottic Stenosis

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939