Search

Background: Misophonia is a condition marked by dysregulated emotions and behaviors in response to trigger sounds, often chewing, breathing, or coughing. Evidence suggests that misophonia develops in adolescence and the emotions and behaviors are a conditioned response to distress, resulting in social avoidance, stress, and family conflict. In addition, co-occurrence with other psychiatric illnesses such as anxiety, OCD, and Tourette syndrome is common. A transdiagnostic cognitive behavioral therapeutic (CBT) approach appears appropriate. There are currently no controlled studies of youth with misophonia. The current paper describes the approach to a pilot randomized, blinded family-based treatment study for youth ages 8-16 years. Preliminary results from a pilot open trial also are described.Methods: A 2-phase dual site telehealth treatment study using a transdiagnostic CBT approach, the Unified Protocol for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders in Children and Adolescents (UP-C/A; Ehrenreich-May et al., 2018), is proposed. Phase 1 consisted of a 4-case pilot of UP-C/A. Phase 2 includes a randomized trial comparing the UP-C/A to a standard relaxation and education protocol.Results: Preliminary results from the pilot show modest improvements in evaluator-rated misophonia symptoms on the Clinical Global Impression Severity and Improvement scales.Limitations: There is little research to inform evidence-based practice for youth with misophonia. Study limitations include lack of standardized misophonia assessment instruments and an absence of formal diagnostic criteria.Conclusions: The current paper describes proposed methods for the first randomized controlled trial for youth with misophonia and their families along with results from a 4-case pilot. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare clinical and imaging findings between extreme lateral lumbar interbody fusion (XLIF) and posterior fusion (PF) via meta-analysis for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases.Methods: English papers reporting clinical and imaging findings for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases with XLIF and PF published electronically in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from January 2006 to August 2019 were retrieved. Two authors independently extracted data and evaluated the quality of the included literature. Meta-analysis of outcome measures was performed using Stata 14 and RevMan 5.3 software.Results: This meta-analysis included 744 patients from nine studies, two of which were prospective studies, while the others were retrospective studies. The quality of each study was determined to be high. The meta-analysis showed no significant differences in the operative time, length of hospital stay, clinical effectiveness, and improvement in postoperative global sagittal alignment between two approaches (P > 0.05). However, XLIF was significantly better than PF in reducing intraoperative blood loss and recovery of local sagittal alignment (P < 0.05). Moreover, the high incidence of postoperative complications were detected in XLIF group (P < 0.05).Conclusions: Both surgical approaches have equally promising clinical effectiveness for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. Although XLIF can reduce intraoperative blood loss and obtain better postoperative local sagittal alignment than PF, the high incidence of postoperative complications should prompt us to consider why XLIF procedure is still being offered to our patients and how we can reduce these complications. In addition, any conclusions should be taken with caution because of the mix of prospective and retrospective studies, and the high heterogeneity and bias. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The patient-provider relationship is considered a cornerstone to delivering high-value healthcare. However, in Medicaid managed care settings, disruptions to this relationship are disproportionately common. In this paper, I evaluate the impact of a primary provider's exit from a Medicaid managed care plan on adult beneficiary healthcare utilization and outcomes. Using an event study approach, I estimate a 5% decrease in the number of beneficiaries with primary care visits in the year following the exit, with slightly larger effects in terms of percentage points for patients with chronic conditions. Additionally, I observe a nearly 50% increase in the number of beneficiaries with a chronic condition who are hospitalized following a disruption. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]