Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
  • About Us
    • About the Ochsner Journal
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Other Publications
    • Ochsner Journal Blog

User menu

  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Ochsner Journal
  • Other Publications
    • Ochsner Journal Blog
  • My alerts
  • Log in
Ochsner Journal

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
  • About Us
    • About the Ochsner Journal
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
Research ArticleQUALITY IMPROVEMENT
Open Access

Decreased Complications After Total Laryngectomy Using a Clinical Care Pathway

Sabrina A. Brody-Camp, Sean M. Parsel, Zane A. Freeman, Edward D. McCoul, Christian Hasney and Brian A. Moore
Ochsner Journal September 2021, 21 (3) 272-280; DOI: https://doi.org/10.31486/toj.20.0070
Sabrina A. Brody-Camp
1Department of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sean M. Parsel
1Department of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA
DO
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Zane A. Freeman
1Department of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA
DO
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Edward D. McCoul
2Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA
3The University of Queensland Faculty of Medicine, Ochsner Clinical School, New Orleans, LA
MD, MPH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christian Hasney
2Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Brian A. Moore
2Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA
3The University of Queensland Faculty of Medicine, Ochsner Clinical School, New Orleans, LA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: brmoore@ochsner.org
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background: Complications following total laryngectomy can lead to increased hospital length of stay (LOS) and increased health care costs. Our objective was to determine the efficacy of a clinical care pathway for improving outcomes for patients following total laryngectomy.

Methods: This quality improvement study included all adult patients undergoing total laryngectomy—either primary or salvage—at a tertiary referral center between January 2013 and December 2018. The primary outcome was hospital LOS measured in postoperative days. The total and specific postoperative complication frequencies were evaluated, as well as 30-day readmission rates and intensive care unit (ICU) LOS.

Results: Sixty-three patients were included in the study: 29 (46.0%) patients before the pathway implementation and 34 (54.0%) patients after pathway implementation. Demographic characteristics between the groups were similar. The prepathway cohort had a higher rate of total complications compared to the postpathway group (relative risk=0.5; 95% CI 0.3-1.0), although the differences in individual complications were similar. The median LOS of 10 days was the same for the 2 cohorts. The median ICU LOS was 1 day greater in the postpathway cohort, but no difference was seen in rates of ICU readmission in the 2 groups. The 30-day readmission rate also was not significant between the 2 groups.

Conclusion: Implementation of a postoperative order set pathway for patients undergoing laryngectomy is associated with decreased overall complication rates. Use of a clinical care pathway may improve outcomes in patients undergoing total laryngectomy.

Keywords:
  • Clinical pathways
  • laryngectomy
  • postoperative care

INTRODUCTION

More than 12,000 cases of laryngeal cancer are diagnosed in the United States annually, leading to almost 3,800 deaths.1 Total laryngectomy is the gold standard for locally advanced laryngeal cancer and for patients who have failed primary chemoradiation therapy or conservative laryngeal surgery. Since the 1990s, the number of total laryngectomies performed nationally has declined.2 The decrease in total laryngectomies is in part because of a shift in the treatment paradigm toward organ preservation, either through nonsurgical treatment or minimally invasive techniques.3-5 In spite of this trend, more than 3,000 total laryngectomies are performed annually in the United States and are predominantly concentrated at high-volume centers.6,7

A patient's anatomy after a total laryngectomy is considerably altered. Breathing, communication, and swallowing functions are significantly affected by surgery. As a result, the postoperative care of laryngectomy patients can be challenging and requires a unique skill set from caretakers and health care providers. If the limitations of these patients are not recognized, devastating outcomes may result. In 2014, a sentinel event resulting in a patient death occurred at our institution. Formal review concluded that the event resulted from misunderstanding postoperative laryngectomy patient needs. In response to this incident, a multidisciplinary team convened to develop a method to prevent unintended morbidity or mortality. The solution was the implementation of a postoperative order set pathway, consisting of a set of time-released orders in the electronic medical record (EMR) that is advanced on a daily basis. The goal of the pathway is to standardize interventions and improve delivery of care. Clinical pathways such as the one used at our institution have been implemented elsewhere for a variety of conditions and have been shown to improve patient outcomes while reducing complications, costs, and length of stay (LOS).8-12

Beginning in January 2016, our institution implemented a laryngectomy pathway for all patients who underwent total laryngectomy. After 3 years, we sought to review how this clinical pathway affected outcomes in postoperative laryngectomy patients. Our objective was to compare patients who had had total laryngectomies at our institution prior to and after pathway implementation and to evaluate whether this intervention decreased complication rates, readmission rates, and LOS. We hypothesized that the use of the laryngectomy pathway would decrease hospital LOS and improve complication rates. To assess these outcomes, we conducted a quality improvement study of our laryngectomy population.

METHODS

Study Setting and Population

We conducted a quality improvement study of retrospective data for patients who underwent total laryngectomy for oncologic indications by 5 head-and-neck surgeons at a tertiary referral center in Southeast Louisiana between January 2013 and December 2018. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had a total laryngectomy for squamous cell carcinoma involving the larynx. Inclusion criteria were based on current procedural terminology (CPT) codes corresponding to total laryngectomy without radical neck dissection (CPT 31360) and total laryngectomy with radical neck dissection (CPT 31365). Patients were excluded from the study if they were <18 years of age or underwent laryngectomy for other than an oncologic etiology.

The population was separated into 2 cohorts depending on the use of the laryngectomy pathway. The pathway was implemented on January 1, 2016, and all patients presenting for laryngectomy after this date received postoperative treatment according to the pathway. Thus, the prepathway cohort included patients receiving total laryngectomy between January 2013 and December 2015, while the postpathway cohort included patients receiving total laryngectomy between January 2016 and December 2018.

Laryngectomy Pathway

The laryngectomy pathway order set was created to address orders commonly used with all laryngectomy patients. Once admitted after a laryngectomy, patients are automatically enrolled. The pathway is a time-dependent order set that is electronically released on subsequent postoperative days depending on patient progression and consists of standard orders on postoperative days 0 through 7 (Figure, Table 1). The patient's nurse allows release of each day's order set manually. This order set includes labs, imaging, early consultation for social work for home durable medical equipment, physical therapy and occupational therapy, and speech and language pathology. Nursing communication orders include placing a sign above the patient's bed that reads “obligate neck breather” and a wristband that reads the same. Also included is an impaired communication protocol that requires a staff member to physically present to the patient's room whenever the call button is pressed. Orders such as tube feeding formula require manual entry depending on the patient and nutrition needs.

Figure.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure.

Flow diagram of laryngectomy clinical pathway. CBC, complete blood count; CMP, comprehensive metabolic panel; HME, heat moisture exchange; lary tube, laryngectomy tube; NPO, nothing by mouth; PEG, percutaneous gastrostomy; PT/OT, physical therapy/occupational therapy; PTH, parathyroid hormone.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Detailed Laryngectomy Pathway Orders

Data Sources and Measurements

Patient information was obtained from manual review of the EMRs at the Ochsner Clinic Foundation by 3 investigators (S.B.C, S.M.P., and Z.A.F.) for all patients meeting inclusion criteria. Specific data were extracted for patient demographics (age, sex, and race), medical history, perioperative details, and postoperative care. Specific medical history included prior chemotherapy or radiation therapy and medical comorbidities. The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) surgical risk were calculated for each patient.13,14 The perioperative data included total operative time and whether or not free tissue transfer was used for reconstruction. Postoperative outcome measures included intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, total hospital LOS, ICU readmissions, 30-day readmission rates, and postoperative complications. Postoperative complications included development of a wound complication (including pharyngocutaneous fistula formation) or hematoma, operative reexploration or intervention, cardiovascular complications, sepsis, and death.

Outcomes and Analysis

The primary outcome was defined as hospital LOS measured as a continuous variable in days. Secondary outcomes were clinical complications, ICU LOS, ICU readmissions, and 30-day readmissions. To quantify the difference in prevalence between the prepathway and postpathway groups, we report risk ratios (RR) and 95% CIs for categorical outcomes. Effect sizes and 95% CIs were calculated using bias-corrected Hedges g statistic for all continuous variables. For binary comparison of hospital LOS, we established 12 days as the expected LOS for total laryngectomy procedures. This expected value is based on an absolute minimum stay of 7 days, with an additional 5 days to account for securing the patient's social work needs. The effect on LOS was compared to use of the pathway, use of free tissue transfer, prior treatment history (chemotherapy or radiation therapy), CCI, and the NSQIP risk score.

All patients had complete datasets and were not excluded from the analysis. SAS statistical software, version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc) was used to conduct all analyses.

This quality improvement study involving protected patient information was approved by the Ochsner Clinic Foundation Institutional Review Board (IRB #2018.240) prior to data collection. The SQUIRE (Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence) reporting recommendations for quality improvement studies were used to ensure adequate reporting of findings.15

RESULTS

A total of 63 patients met inclusion criteria for the study, and all had follow-up data for analysis. The majority of the patients were white (69.8%) and male (82.5%), and the median age at time of surgery was 65.0 years (interquartile range [IQR] 59.0-73.0 years).

Twenty-nine (46.0%) patients were in the prepathway cohort, and 34 (54.0%) patients were in the postpathway cohort. Patients in the 2 groups were similar with respect to patient demographics, use of alcohol or tobacco, and prior chemotherapy or radiation therapy. The postpathway cohort had an increased percentage of free tissue transfer procedures compared with the prepathway cohort (52.9% vs 20.7%) (Table 2).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Baseline Demographics Overall and by Cohort

Both cohorts had a median hospital LOS of 10 days (P=0.647). The median ICU LOS of 3 days for the postpathway cohort was significantly higher than the 2 days for the prepathway cohort, but the rates of ICU readmission were not different between the groups (RR=0.4; 95% CI 0.1-1.5).

Because the data for hospital and ICU LOS were skewed, RR could not be calculated, so the hospital LOS was treated as a binary entity with a cutoff of 12 days as the expected LOS. RR (95% CI) for the comparison of hospital LOS <12 days and >12 days was calculated to be 0.9 (0.5-1.4). Multivariate analysis controlling for morbidity indices—CCI and NSQIP risk—showed no difference in LOS >12 or <12 days.

The 30-day readmission rate was similar between cohorts (RR=1.4; 95% CI 0.9-2.2). Overall, we found a reduction in the rate of total complications among the postpathway cohort compared with the prepathway group (RR=0.5; 95% CI 0.3-1.0), although the differences in individual complications were similar. Table 3 presents outcomes and complications data.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3.

Postoperative Outcomes by Cohort

DISCUSSION

Our study demonstrates a decreased overall complication rate with the implementation of a postoperative clinical care pathway in a cohort of patients undergoing total laryngectomy. However, we found no difference in hospital LOS or in ICU or 30-day readmission rates.

As rates of laryngectomies performed across the United States have decreased, performance of these procedures has become concentrated at high-volume academic centers.2,6,16 These specialized institutions must be equipped to properly care for this unique group of patients through education of the patient, family, and staff and by implementing measures that streamline care while safeguarding against potential complications.

Verma and Mahboubi examined trends in total laryngectomies performed in the state of California between 1996 and 2010, and similar to national trends, found an overall decrease in total laryngectomy procedures performed during this period, along with an increasing proportion performed at tertiary referral centers.16 Accompanying this trend, the authors found an increase in the overall complication rate. The authors hypothesized that the higher complication rate could be explained by the greater complexity of total laryngectomies with changing treatment protocols and the increasing number of salvage (postradiated) surgeries. Contrary to the findings of the Verma and Mahboubi study, our data demonstrate a decrease in total complication rates associated with total laryngectomies between January 2016 and December 2018. Our finding perhaps indicates a protective effect of the laryngectomy pathway, safeguarding against potential risks that patients undergoing total laryngectomy face postoperatively.

Clinical pathways have been proven to reduce resource utilization without jeopardizing safety.8-12 In 1999, Hanna et al examined how a clinical pathway impacted cost and quality of care for postoperative laryngectomy patients at their institution.11 The study showed a 14.4% reduction in hospital cost associated with pathway implementation, as well as a decrease in readmission rate. Our study, while similar in design to that of Hanna et al, differs in that our postintervention population is more than double the size and includes patients reconstructed with free tissue transfer techniques. While we did not examine cost, we found no significant difference between the groups in terms of readmission rate. Our data provide a contemporary example of the use of a clinical pathway for patients undergoing laryngectomy.

Our results echo the positive findings of other studies examining the effects of clinical pathways on patient outcomes.8-10,12 We found a decrease in the total complication rate in the postpathway cohort. Thus, the prepathway group was at increased risk of having a complication overall even though individual complication rates did not differ significantly between the 2 cohorts. The pathway did not appear to have an effect on overall hospital LOS, even when controlling for comorbidities using the NSQIP and CCI.

Use of free tissue transfer to reconstruct laryngectomy defects has increased at our institution since December 2015, coinciding with the implementation of the laryngectomy pathway. Free flaps, chiefly from the anterolateral thigh, are used for reconstruction in patients with a history of radiation and for bulky primary disease. Free flaps have been proven to reduce fistula rates, feeding tube dependence, and risk of remote esophageal stricture in patients undergoing total laryngectomy who have failed organ preservation treatment.17 Patients who undergo free tissue transfer for defects of the head and neck typically stay in the ICU for an average of 2.4 days,18 and those who have free flap reconstruction after total laryngectomy have a longer LOS than those not requiring free tissue transfer.19 A significantly higher percentage of free flaps was used for reconstruction in our postpathway group. This bias in our study could help to explain the increased ICU LOS in the postpathway group and could have mitigated the decrease in overall hospital LOS. In other words, we could have expected a significant increase in LOS given the use of more free flaps; however, perhaps the pathway helped prevent such an increase.

This study has several limitations. Primarily, the retrospective design predisposes our results to reporting bias based on the accuracy of diagnosis classification in the EMR. Reporting bias may lead to inaccurate representation of complications, as they may have been inappropriately recorded. The outcome of LOS is less likely to be affected by reporting bias, although multiple confounding variables may alter the LOS, including patient comorbidities, prior radiation therapy or chemotherapy, and nutrition status. To control for confounding variables, we performed multivariate analyses based on patient comorbidities and surgical risk and found no difference between groups in reference to overall hospital LOS. For the binary comparison of hospital LOS between the groups, we chose the number 12 arbitrarily, although we felt that 12 days was a reasonable expected LOS given an absolute minimum of 7 days and 5 days to accommodate social factors. Further, selection bias may arise as the 2 cohorts are from different time periods. Surgeon expertise likely improves over time, which would affect the total complication rate in the postpathway group. Further follow-up of postpathway cohorts is necessary to confirm the trends found in this study.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of a postoperative order set pathway for patients undergoing total laryngectomy was associated with a decrease in the overall complication rate at our institution. In an era of declining use of total laryngectomy and higher concentration of total laryngectomies performed at high-volume academic centers, measures that standardize care and improve outcomes should be implemented when possible.

This article meets the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and the American Board of Medical Specialties Maintenance of Certification competencies for Patient Care, Medical Knowledge, Systems-Based Practice, and Practice-Based Learning and Improvement.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors have no financial or proprietary interest in the subject matter of this article.

  • ©2021 by the author(s); Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY)

©2021 by the author(s); licensee Ochsner Journal, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode) that permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Key statistics for laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers. American Cancer Society. Updated January 12, 2021. Accessed February 3, 2021. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/laryngeal-and-hypopharyngeal-cancer/about/key-statistics.html">
  2. 2.↵
    1. Orosco RK,
    2. Weisman RA,
    3. Chang DC,
    4. Brumund KT
    . Total laryngectomy: national and regional case volume trends 1998-2008. Otolaryngl Head Neck Surg. 2013;148(2):243-248. doi: 10.1177/0194599812466645
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Wolf GT,
    2. Fisher SG,
    3. Hong WK
    , et al; Department of Veterans Affairs Laryngeal Cancer Study Group. Induction chemotherapy plus radiation compared with surgery plus radiation in patients with advanced laryngeal cancer. N Engl J Med. 1991;324(24):1685-1690. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199106133242402
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.
    1. Forastiere AA,
    2. Goepfert H,
    3. Maor M,
    4. et al.
    Concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy for organ preservation in advanced laryngeal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(22):2091-2098. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa031317
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Hoffman HT,
    2. Porter K,
    3. Karnell LH,
    4. et al.
    Laryngeal cancer in the United States: changes in demographics, patterns of care, and survival. Laryngoscope. 2006;116(9 Pt 2 Suppl 111):1-13. doi: 10.1097/01.mlg.0000236095.97947.26
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Gourin CG,
    2. Frick KD
    . National trends in laryngeal cancer surgery and the effect of surgeon and hospital volume on short-term outcomes and cost of care. Laryngoscope. 2012;122(1):88-94. doi: 10.1002/lary.22409
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Maddox PT,
    2. Davies L
    . Trends in total laryngectomy in the era of organ preservation: a population-based study. Otolaryngl Head Neck Surg. 2012;147(1):85-90. doi: 10.1177/0194599812438170
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Rotter T,
    2. Kinsman L,
    3. James E,
    4. et al.
    Clinical pathways: effects on professional practice, patient outcomes, length of stay and hospital costs. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(3):CD006632. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006632.pub2
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  9. 9.
    1. Gendron KM,
    2. Lai SY,
    3. Weinstein GS,
    4. et al.
    Clinical care pathway for head and neck cancer: a valuable tool for decreasing resource utilization. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2002;128(3):258-262. doi: 10.1001/archotol.128.3.258
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Husbands JM,
    2. Weber RS,
    3. Karpati RL,
    4. et al.
    Clinical care pathways: decreasing resource utilization in head and neck surgical patients. Otolaryngl Head Neck Surg. 1999;121(6):755-759. doi: 10.1053/hn.1999.v121.a98217
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Hanna E,
    2. Schultz S,
    3. Doctor D,
    4. Vural E,
    5. Stern S,
    6. Suen J
    . Development and implementation of a clinical pathway for patients undergoing total laryngectomy: impact on cost and quality of care. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1999;125(11):1247-1251. doi: 10.1001/archotol.125.11.1247
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Moreno MA,
    2. Bonilla-Velez J
    . Clinical pathway for abbreviated postoperative hospital stay in free tissue transfer to the head and neck: impact in resource utilization and surgical outcomes. Head Neck. 2019;41(4):982-992. doi: 10.1002/hed.25525
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. 13.↵
    1. Bilimoria KY,
    2. Liu Y,
    3. Paruch JL,
    4. et al.
    Development and evaluation of the universal ACS NSQIP surgical risk calculator: a decision aid and informed consent tool for patients and surgeons. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217(5):833-842.e1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.07.385
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  14. 14.↵
    1. Charlson M,
    2. Szatrowski TP,
    3. Peterson J,
    4. Gold J
    . Validation of a combined comorbidity index. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994;47(11):1245-1251. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(94)90129-5
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Ogrinc G,
    2. Mooney SE,
    3. Estrada C,
    4. et al.
    The SQUIRE (Standards for QUality Improvement Reporting Excellence) guidelines for quality improvement reporting: explanation and elaboration. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008;17 Suppl 1 (Suppl_1):i13-i32. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2008.029058
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. Verma SP,
    2. Mahboubi H
    . The changing landscape of total laryngectomy surgery. Otolaryngl Head Neck Surg. 2014;150(3):413-418. doi: 10.1177/0194599813514515
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Withrow KP,
    2. Rosenthal EL,
    3. Gourin CG,
    4. et al.
    Free tissue transfer to manage salvage laryngectomy defects after organ preservation failure. Laryngoscope. 2007;117(5):781-784. doi: 10.1097/MLG.0b013e3180332e39
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Spiegel JH,
    2. Polat JK
    . Microvascular flap reconstruction by otolaryngologists: prevalence, postoperative care, and monitoring techniques. Laryngoscope. 2007;117(3):485-490. doi: 10.1097/MLG.0b013e31802d6e66
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Goepfert RP,
    2. Hutcheson KA,
    3. Lewin JS,
    4. et al.
    Complications, hospital length of stay, and readmission after total laryngectomy. Cancer. 2017;123(10):1760-1767. doi: 10.1002/cncr.30483
    OpenUrlCrossRef
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Ochsner Journal: 21 (3)
Ochsner Journal
Vol. 21, Issue 3
Sep 2021
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Advertising (PDF)
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Ochsner Journal.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Decreased Complications After Total Laryngectomy Using a Clinical Care Pathway
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Ochsner Journal
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Ochsner Journal web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Decreased Complications After Total Laryngectomy Using a Clinical Care Pathway
Sabrina A. Brody-Camp, Sean M. Parsel, Zane A. Freeman, Edward D. McCoul, Christian Hasney, Brian A. Moore
Ochsner Journal Sep 2021, 21 (3) 272-280; DOI: 10.31486/toj.20.0070

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Decreased Complications After Total Laryngectomy Using a Clinical Care Pathway
Sabrina A. Brody-Camp, Sean M. Parsel, Zane A. Freeman, Edward D. McCoul, Christian Hasney, Brian A. Moore
Ochsner Journal Sep 2021, 21 (3) 272-280; DOI: 10.31486/toj.20.0070
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • INTRODUCTION
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • CONCLUSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Enhancing Physician Satisfaction and Patient Safety Through an Artificial Intelligence–Driven Scheduling System in Anesthesiology
  • Improving Resident Physician Participation in Reporting Patient Safety and Quality Concerns
  • Lower Double-Wall Puncture Rate During Ultrasound-Guided Internal Jugular Vein Cannulation Using Sharper, Narrower-Gauge, and/or Length-Optimized Needles: A 6-Year Quality Improvement Clinical Series in Adult Patients
Show more QUALITY IMPROVEMENT

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Clinical pathways
  • laryngectomy
  • postoperative care

Ochsner Journal Blog

Current Post

Be Careful Where You Publish -- Part 2

Our Content

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Ahead of Print
  • Archive
  • Featured Contributors
  • Ochsner Journal Blog
  • Archive at PubMed Central

Information & Forms

  • Instructions for Authors
  • Instructions for Reviewers
  • Submission Checklist
  • FAQ
  • License for Publishing-Author Attestation
  • Patient Consent Form
  • Submit a Manuscript

Services & Contacts

  • Permissions
  • Sign up for our electronic table of contents
  • Feedback Form
  • Contact Us

About Us

  • Editorial Board
  • About the Ochsner Journal
  • Ochsner Health
  • University of Queensland-Ochsner Clinical School
  • Alliance of Independent Academic Medical Centers

© 2025 Ochsner Clinic Foundation

Powered by HighWire