Aerodigestive Decision 2016 Background Aerodigestive Decision 2016 Ask

Aerodigestive Decision 2016

Background

• • Aerodigestive Decision 2016 Ask Questions Be Courteous Vote Talk to a Delegate

Aerodigestive Decision 2016 Delegates GI: • • • James Franciosi (Orlando) Sari Acra (Vanderbilt) Phil Putnam (Cincinnati) Joel Friedlander (Colorado) Rachel Rosen (Boston Children’s) Pulmonary: • • • Paul Moore (Vanderbilt) Mikhail Kazachkov (NYU) Paul Boesch (Mayo) Erik Hysinger (Cincinnati) Corey Daines (U. Arizona) Mohammad Fazili (Vanderbilt) Conference: • • Christopher Wootten (Vanderbilt) Jeremy Prager (Colorado) SLP: • • • Gwen Provo-Bell (Vanderbilt) Jenny Maybee (Colorado) Amy Faherty (Seattle) ENT: • • • Sandro de Alarcon (Cincinnati) Kaalan Johnson (Seattle) Steve Goudy (CHOA/Emory) Deepak Mehta (Texas Children’s) Scott Schraff (Phoenix Children’s)

1. What is the current state of recognition/understanding of who an aerodigestive patient is and what an aerodigestive program does? a. Not at all recognized or understood b. Recognized and understood only within large academic centers c. Reasonably recognized and understood across a range of providers and savvy laypersons d. Well recognized and understood across a broad range of primary care and specialty providers as well as the general public

2. The top 5 essential defining features/functions in the care cycle of an aerodigestive program are? a. Team meeting b. Team involvement c. Combined endoscopy d. Intake e. Care coordination f. Pre-scheduling of appointments/procedures g. Wrap-up visit with family h. Summary document i. Communication j. Patient inclusion criteria

3. What are the top 5 priorities for aerodigestive research (vote more than once)? : a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j. Disease specific outcomes Validation of the aerodigestive approach Diagnosis of aspiration GERD Development of care pathways Standardization of diagnostic procedures Treatment of aspiration Definition of aerodigestive disorders Aerodigestive patient registry Factors for success of airway reconstruction

4. What are the top 5 most useful outcome measures for aerodigestive research (5)? : a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j. Patient quality of life Tracheostomy status/decannulation Hospitalization/acute care utilization Cost of care Oral feeding status Polysomnogram indices Pulmonary function testing indices Esophageal impedance/p. H indices Chest CT findings Functional and developmental scores

5. Should a section on “Multidisciplinary Care of the Aerodigestive Patient” be created within the American Academy of Pediatrics, or are the various subspecialty societies the best place to gather interest, promote education, foster research, given that we will continue to have an annual Aerodigestive Meeting (choose one)? a. Establish an Aerodigestive Group under the AAP only b. Establish and maintain Aerodigestive Groups under subspecialty societies only c. Establish and maintain Aerodigestive Groups under the AAP and within subspecialty societies d. Establish an Aerodigestive Group under an umbrella organization other than the AAP (such as American College of Surgeons) e. Establish an Aerodigestive Group under an umbrella organization other than the AAP (such as American College of Surgeons) and within subspecialty societies

6. How can the annual Aerodigestive Meeting be altered to meet the needs of the whole (choose more than one if necessary)? a. No change—the current format meets the needs of the whole b. More podium and poster time allowed for scientific presentation c. More discussion time allowed to develop aerodigestive research agendas d. More discussion time allowed to develop aerodigestive educational agendas e. 2. 5 days is too short to meet the needs of the whole f. A 2. 5 day meeting is too long g. More time allowed to address the business-ofhealthcare needs of an aerodigestive program

7. Educational content you wish to see more of next year includes (pick two): a. Value based delivery of aerodigestive care b. Telehealth and delivery-of-care innovations c. Expert panels on common aerodigestive conditions d. Lectures and hands-on experience with novel techniques to diagnose and manage disease e. Scientific presentations from groups around the country f. Expert panels working through tough cases g. Nitty gritty business details from successful programs

8. Evaluate the statement: I believe this annual meeting and the providers who attend it NEED organization into an ‘Aerodigestive Society’: a. b. c. d. e. Strongly disagree Somewhat disagree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat agree Strongly agree

9. Evaluate the statement: I believe this annual meeting and the providers who attend it COULD BENEFIT FROM organization into an ‘Aerodigestive Society’: a. b. c. d. e. Strongly disagree Somewhat disagree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat agree Strongly agree

10. The most significant benefits of an Aerodigestive Society would be (pick 3): a. b. c. d. e. f. g. Professional recognition that members have expertise in aerodigestive care Patient recognition that members have expertise in aerodigestive care Establishment of guidelines that define an aerodigestive team and its common practices Clarification of research aims for the aerodigestive society as a whole Establishment of an educational program for primary care providers interested in complex care Establishment of a Program Committee to inform the content of the annual meeting Establish a small group of individuals who liaison with the subspecialty societies