Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wtssw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-01T05:50:19.889Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Why should disorders of the ear, nose and throat be treated by the same specialty? Can this situation persist?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 October 2008

S Yalamanchili
S Yalamanchili*
Affiliation:
The Royal Free and University College Medical School, London, UK
*
Address for correspondence: Ms S Yalamanchili, 8 Bronte Close, Kettering NN16 9XN, UK. E-mail: seemayalamanchili@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The surgical specialty of otorhinolaryngology has its origins in the nineteenth century. Subsequently, the specialty also incorporated allied disciplines such as plastics and head and neck surgery. Following World War II, the survival of the specialty was threatened by the advent of antibiotics and the rise of the general surgeon. Despite this, the specialty of ENT was strengthened by strong post-war leadership and robust training.

Today, with ENT knowledge ever increasing, the subspecialties have again begun to subdivide. Specialisation brings improved efficiency and outcomes; however, there remains a great need for the ENT generalist. Not all cases require subspecialist attention, and the generalist remains the basis of competent emergency cover. The natural development of otorhinolaryngology has brought the invaluable synergistic knowledge required to comprehensively treat disorders of the ear, nose and throat, knowledge that must not be overlooked when shaping the future of the specialty.

Keywords

History Of MedicineOtolaryngologyOtorhinolaryngologic Diseases
Type
Review Articles
Information
The Journal of Laryngology & Otology , Volume 123 , Issue 4 , April 2009 , pp. 367 - 371
Copyright
Copyright © JLO (1984) Limited 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Awarded the British Association of Otorhinolaryngologists and Head and Neck Surgeons Undergraduate Essay Prize 2007, at the Annual British Association of Otorhinolaryngologists and Head and Neck Surgeons Meeting, 1 February 2008, Royal Society of Medicine, London, UK.

References

1 Weir, N. Otolaryngology: An Illustrated History. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 1990Google Scholar
2 Najim, O, Powell, S. So you want to be an ENT surgeon. BMJ Career Focus 2007;334:205–7Google Scholar
3 Bailey, BJ. The status of otolaryngology in the post-World War II era. Part 1 – Defining the problem. Laryngoscope 1996;106:1053–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4 Richards, LG. Otolaryngology in transition (Presidential address). Laryngoscope 1948;58:455–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 Lederer, FL. Otolaryngology: what are the restrictions and where are its borderlines? Laryngoscope 1949;59:469–81CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6 Bailey, BJ. The status of otolaryngology in the post-World War II era. Part 2 – A look to the future. Laryngoscope 1996;106:1191–4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7 Boies, LR. The future of otolaryngology. Laryngoscope 1952;62:709–21CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8 Hoople, GD. Comments on a fourth year of training for certification in otolaryngology. Laryngoscope 1958;68;1579–85CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9 Ferlito, A, Buckley, JG, Ossoff, RH, Rinaldo, A, Weir, N. The future of laryngology. Acta Otolaryngol 2001;121:859–67CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10 Morgan, M, Gupta, D. A career in otorhinolaryngology. BMJ Careers 2002;324:S89Google Scholar
11 Irving, RM, Proops, DW. The future of ORL-HNS and associated specialities series: the future of otology. J Laryngol Otol 2000;114:3–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12 Ramsden, R, Sayeed, S. The future of ORL-HNS and associated specialities series: the future of neuro-otology. J Laryngol Otol 2000;114:89–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13 Darzi, A, McKay, S. Recent advances in minimal access surgery. BMJ 2002;324:31–4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14 Gourin, CG, Terris, DJ. Surgical robotics in otolaryngology – expanding the technology envelope. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2004;12:204–8CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15 Ribeiro, B. Surgery in the 21st century. Joint Committee on Higher Surgical Training [www.jchst.org]. London: The Royal College of Surgeons of England; c2006 [cited 2007 Jul 1]. Available from: http://www.jchst.org/about/president/docs/presidents_speech_to_kings_fund.pdfGoogle Scholar
16 Smith, A. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, London: printed for Strahan W. and Cadall T., 1776Google Scholar
17 Baguley, D, Luxon, L. The future of ORL-HNS and associated specialties series: The future of audiological rehabilitation. J Laryngol Otol 2000;114:167–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18 Cantrell, RW. Paediatric otolaryngology: too much specialisation? Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2002;128:765–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19 Baguley, DM, Moffat, DA, Ramsden, RT. Otology and audiology in the UK: isolated or insulated practice? Clin Otolaryngol 2006;31:4–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20 The London Deanery [www.londondeanery.ac.uk]. London: London Deanery; c2007 [cited 2007 Jul 1]. Available from: http://www.londondeanery.ac.uk/careers/careerguide/otolaryngology-entGoogle Scholar
21 Browning, GG, Burton, MJ. The future of ORL-HNS and associated specialties series: quality issues in otorhinolaryngology: part I. J Laryngol Otol 2000;114:817–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22 Jones, N. Whose nose is it anyway? ENT News 2001;9:49Google Scholar
23 Murray, A, Dempster, J. BAHNO surgical specialties: same patients, different practices? J Laryngol Otol 2005;119:97–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24 O'Sullivan, B, Mackillop, W, Gilbert, R, Gaze, M, Lundgren, J, Atkinson, C et al. Controversies in the management of laryngeal cancer: results of an international survey of patterns of care. Radiother Oncol 1994;31:23–32CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25 Burton, MJ, Browning, GG. The future of ORL-HNS and associated specialties series: quality issues in otorhinolaryngology: part II. J Laryngol Otol 2000;114:910–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26 Van den Broek, P. Global training in ORL-HNS training in otorhinolaryngology: a European perspective. J Laryngol Otol 2000;114:331–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27 Kneebone, R, Darzi, A. New professional roles in surgery. BMJ 2005;330:803–4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28 McWhinnie, DL, Samuel, AW, Kingsnorth, AN. Controversial topics in surgery: surgical care practitioners. Bulletin of The Royal College of Surgeons of England 2005;87:239–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29 Cherry, J, Weir, R. The future of ORL-HNS and associated specialties series: medicolegal and ethical aspects of ORL-HNS in the new millennium. J Laryngol Otol 2000;114:737–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar