Read Original Story

Say Aaa! Then Zzz: Tonsillectomy Helps Kids Sleep


3 Star


Say Aaa! Then Zzz: Tonsillectomy Helps Kids Sleep

Our Review Summary

The evidence is really weak on the claim made in the headline, as the story later acknowledges. We wish the story had spent a little more time on costs and quantifying benefits instead of paying so much attention to one anecdotal case where a surgery was done to alleviate snoring.

The health care system needs to continue to be critical of interventions that don’t work or are harmful.  It’s clear that we haven’t had good evidence for much of how this old procedure has been done.


Why This Matters

Parents worry when their children can’t sleep well or have other problems related to enlarged tonsils, but surgery, as this story notes, is not without complications. Instead of giving the subject a light touch, the story dug into some of the details necessary to give parents the information they need to make good decisions. Writers should be careful, though, to distinguish between the real health problems related to tonsil problems and mere snoring, which is harmless in most cases. The headline for this story was a real shame, because the story itself contained good information.


Does the story adequately discuss the costs of the intervention?

Not Satisfactory

Oddly, the story mentions physician reimbursements for tonsil surgery but makes no mention of patient costs. “Rosenfeld disputes Obama’s claim, saying that insurers usually pay a surgeon $200 to $300 for tonsil surgery.”

Does the story adequately quantify the benefits of the treatment/test/product/procedure?

Not Satisfactory

The benefits are never quantified, which is a big problem in this case because so much time is spent on the anecdotal family in the lead. We can’t understand why a headline this bold was put on a story that actually takes pains to point out the lack of evidence supporting tonsil surgeries.

Does the story adequately explain/quantify the harms of the intervention?

The story does a reasonable job quantifying the harms, but we wish it had gone deeper. It says, “But Tyler’s parents were worried about the surgery. It’s usually done outpatient now, but with general anesthesia. That’s never without some risk…. Other complications include pain after surgery and the risk of bleeding; about 4 percent of people have complications that require readmission to the hospital.”

Does the story seem to grasp the quality of the evidence?


The story could have done much more to evaluate the quality of the evidence, but we give it points here for addressing the lack of support for tonsil surgeries, which most parents likely assume are a standard part of growing up. “Then doctors started noticing that kids were still getting sore throats, even after having their tonsils taken out. But it wasn’t until clinical trials were completed in the early 1980s that there was proof that tonsillectomy really only helped children with severe, recurrent throat infections.” Later it says, “Despite hundreds of studies, there’s still surprisingly little research on whether tonsillectomy really helps reduce the risk of sore throats. The operation continues to be controversial.”
And it says, “There have been very few randomized studies on the effects of tonsillectomy for sleep-disordered breathing. Most of the researchers have asked parents or children if they noticed improvements, and looked at a single measure, like behavior or quality of life. Still, the ENTs recommend tonsillectomy for sleep-disordered breathing, saying it reduces symptoms in most children.”

Does the story commit disease-mongering?


The story does not engage in overt disease-mongering. Good caveats that “not all children with big tonsils have sleep-disordered breathing or frequent throat infections. Because of that, in 2002 the American Academy of Pediatrics recommended that children have a sleep study before surgery is considered. About 530,000 tonsillectomies are performed in the United States each year.”

Does the story use independent sources and identify conflicts of interest?

Not Satisfactory

The story only quotes one physician, and that source is a surgeon We would have liked to have seen more independent sources tapped – a pediatrician or family medicine doctor would have been helpful.

Does the story compare the new approach with existing alternatives?

Not Satisfactory

No meaningful discussion comparing alternative treatments.

The story was focused on surgery.  There was no discussion of prevention – of indoor allergens (and avoiding/treating them with antihistamines) or of obesity.

Does the story establish the availability of the treatment/test/product/procedure?


The story does a great job explaining how tonsil surgery as a first resort has evolved over the years.

Does the story establish the true novelty of the approach?


It is clear from the story that surgery is not novel.

Does the story appear to rely solely or largely on a news release?


The story definitely does not rely on a news release.

Total Score: 6 of 10 Satisfactory


Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.