Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ PubMed Centralarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
PubMed Central
Article . 2025
License: CC BY
Data sources: PubMed Central
Cureus
Article . 2025 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
Cureus
Article . 2025
versions View all 3 versions
addClaim

Impacted Fish Bones: A National Survey

Authors: Butler, Jemma; Chew, Adan; Giblett, Neil A; Mowat, Andrew;

Impacted Fish Bones: A National Survey

Abstract

Background Impacted fish bones are a common referral to the ear, nose, and throat (ENT) acute on-call service. Diagnosis is often challenging as neither lateral neck radiograph (X-ray) nor flexible nasendoscopy (FNE) is perfectly sensitive. Management dilemmas are common, particularly as bones can result in significant complications. Objectives The objective of the study is to assess awareness of current ENT UK guidelines, investigate practice patterns, and identify knowledge gaps in the management of patients presenting with suspected fish bone foreign bodies in the upper aerodigestive tract. Design This is a cross-sectional survey study. Setting A UK-wide survey was distributed across ENT departments. Participants Fifty-three respondents comprise consultants, higher specialty ENT trainees, core surgical trainees, general practice (GP) trainees, and foundation doctors. Main outcome measures The main outcome measures are clinician awareness of ENT UK guidelines, confidence in management, preferred investigation pathways, knowledge of radio-opaque versus radiolucent fish species, and common symptoms, findings, and complications associated with fish bone foreign bodies. Results Of the 53 clinicians surveyed, 48 (91%) were unaware of any guidelines for fish bone foreign body management, while only three (6%) identified the ENT UK guideline. Confidence in management was not significantly associated with seniority (p = 0.31). Knowledge of radiological characteristics of fish species was variable, with 35 (66%) correctly identifying radio-opaque species and six (11%) exclusively identifying radiolucent species. The most commonly reported presenting symptoms were odynophagia (n = 42, 79%), dysphagia (n = 38, 72%), and unilateral neck pain (n = 31, 58%). The palatine tonsils (n = 29, 55%) and tongue base (n = 24, 45%) were the most frequent anatomical sites for impaction. Computed tomography (CT) imaging was the most commonly selected subsequent investigation when initial assessments (FNE or X-ray) were inconclusive (n = 40, 75%). Conclusions This study reveals significant variability in the awareness, investigation, and management of fish bone foreign bodies among ENT clinicians in the UK. There is a need for updated, post-pandemic guidelines alongside targeted education to enhance clinical confidence, reduce unnecessary investigations, and improve patient outcomes.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Emergency Medicine

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Green