Search

Background: Psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder is often extensive and resource-intensive. Mentalisation-based therapy is a psychodynamically oriented treatment option for borderline personality disorder, which includes a case formulation, psychoeducation, and group and individual therapy. The evidence on short-term compared with long-term mentalisation-based therapy is currently unknown.Methods/design: The Short-Term MBT Project (MBT-RCT) is a single-centre, parallel-group, investigator-initiated, randomised clinical superiority trial in which short-term (20 weeks) will be compared with long-term (14 months) mentalisation-based therapy for outpatients with subthreshold or diagnosed borderline personality disorder. Outcome assessors, data managers, the data safety and monitoring committee, statisticians, and decision-makers will be blinded to treatment allocation. Participants will be assessed before randomisation and at 8, 16, and 24 months after randomisation. The primary outcome will be the severity of borderline symptomatology assessed with the Zanarini Rating Scale for Borderline Personality Disorder. Secondary outcomes will be functional impairment (Work and Social Adjustment Scale), quality of life (Short-Form Health Survey 36-mental component), global functioning (Global Assessment of Functioning), and proportion of participants with severe self-harm. In this paper, we present a detailed statistical analysis plan including a comprehensive explanation of the planned statistical analyses, methods to handle missing data, and assessments of the underlying statistical assumptions. Final statistical analyses will be conducted independently by two statisticians following the present plan.Discussion: We have developed this statistical analysis plan before unblinding of the trial results in line with the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Conference on Harmonization of Good Clinical Practice Guidelines, which should increase the validity of the MBT-RCT trial by mitigation of analysis bias.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03677037 . Registered on 19 September 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: The use of spinal cord stimulation for chronic pain after lumbar spine surgery is increasing, yet rigorous evidence of its efficacy is lacking.Objective: To investigate the efficacy of spinal cord burst stimulation, which involves the placement of an implantable pulse generator connected to electrodes with leads that travel into the epidural space posterior to the spinal cord dorsal columns, in patients with chronic radiculopathy after surgery for degenerative lumbar spine disorders.Design, Setting, and Participants: This placebo-controlled, crossover, randomized clinical trial in 50 patients was conducted at St Olavs University Hospital in Norway, with study enrollment from September 5, 2018, through April 28, 2021. The date of final follow-up was May 20, 2022.Interventions: Patients underwent two 3-month periods with spinal cord burst stimulation and two 3-month periods with placebo stimulation in a randomized order. Burst stimulation consisted of closely spaced, high-frequency electrical stimuli delivered to the spinal cord. The stimulus consisted of a 40-Hz burst mode of constant-current stimuli with 4 spikes per burst and an amplitude corresponding to 50% to 70% of the paresthesia perception threshold.Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was difference in change from baseline in the self-reported Oswestry Disability Index (ODI; range, 0 points [no disability] to 100 points [maximum disability]; the minimal clinically important difference was 10 points) score between periods with burst stimulation and placebo stimulation. The secondary outcomes were leg and back pain, quality of life, physical activity levels, and adverse events.Results: Among 50 patients who were randomized (mean age, 52.2 [SD, 9.9] years; 27 [54%] were women), 47 (94%) had at least 1 follow-up ODI score and 42 (84%) completed all stimulation randomization periods and ODI measurements. The mean ODI score at baseline was 44.7 points and the mean changes in ODI score were -10.6 points for the burst stimulation periods and -9.3 points for the placebo stimulation periods, resulting in a mean between-group difference of -1.3 points (95% CI, -3.9 to 1.3 points; P = .32). None of the prespecified secondary outcomes showed a significant difference. Nine patients (18%) experienced adverse events, including 4 (8%) who required surgical revision of the implanted system.Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with chronic radicular pain after lumbar spine surgery, spinal cord burst stimulation, compared with placebo stimulation, after placement of a spinal cord stimulator resulted in no significant difference in the change from baseline in self-reported back pain-related disability.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03546738. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To compare patient satisfaction, procedural variables, and safety with transradial access (TRA) and transfemoral access (TFA) in patients undergoing transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).Materials and Methods: From February 2019 to August 2021, 130 patients undergoing TACE for HCC were randomly allocated to the TRA (n = 65) or TFA (n = 65) group. Vascular closure devices were not used after TFA-TACE. All patients completed the post-catheterization questionnaire and 8-item Short-Form Health Survey 1 day after TACE.Results: Technical success rate, crossover rate, contrast agent dose, fluoroscopy time, procedure time, air kerma, dose-area product, length of hospital stay, and total cost were similar between the two groups (all p > 0.05). The incidence and severity of adverse events were also similar between the two groups (all p > 0.05). However, overall discomfort, difficulty going to the bathroom, difficulty feeding or self-caring, difficulty walking, general health, physical function, role physical function, social function, mental health, and role emotional function were better in the TRA group than in the TFA group (all p < 0.001). Consequently, more patients preferred the current access for their next procedure in the TRA group than in the TFA group (90.8% vs. 24.6%; p < 0.001).Conclusion: In patients undergoing TACE for HCC, using TRA instead of TFA can improve patient satisfaction without compromising procedural variables and safety.Key Points: • Transradial access (TRA) enabled early ambulation after transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), resulting in significant increase in activities of daily living and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) compared to transfemoral access (TFA) when vascular closure devices were not used. • Procedural variables (contrast agent dose, fluoroscopy time, procedure time, air kerma, dose-area product, length of hospital stay, and total cost) were not significantly different between patients who received TRA-TACE and TFA-TACE. • The incidence and severity of adverse events were similar between patients who received TRA-TACE and TFA-TACE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) may impact patients' life significantly. The aim of this survey was to analyse the impact of the ICD on quality of life (QoL) metrics from the patient's perspective. 'Living with an ICD' was a prospective, multicentre study with an online questionnaire submitted to the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) Research Network centres as well as patient associations from 10 European countries; it was filled-in directly and personally by the patients that were invited to participate, with a minimal interaction or influence from the healthcare professionals. Overall, the questionnaire was completed by 1809 patients (624 women, 34.5%). Patients in their 60s and 70s and from Western Europe were the most represented. The median time from first ICD implantation was 5 years (IQR 2-10). Device-related complications were reported by 505 patients (22.4%), including one or more inappropriate shocks (n = 209, 11.6%). Almost half the respondents reported improved QoL, with a more favourable impact for those receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator (CRT-D), and only a 10th experienced a significant decrease in QoL. The occurrence of complications remained a major predictor of deteriorated QoL (odds ratio 2.1, 95% confidence interval 1.4-3.0, P < 0.001). In conclusion, most patients have a globally positive view and acceptance of ICD therapy, reporting preserved to improved QoL after device implantation. Complications, namely inappropriate shocks, affect the expectation of living a normal life post-implant and are associated with a significant decrease in QoL. Our findings also highlight the importance of a detailed informed consent process and the involvement of the patient in the decision-making process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Late-life depression is common, modifiable, yet under-treated. Service silos and human resources shortage contribute to insufficient prevention and intervention. We describe an implementation research protocol of collaborative stepped care and peer support model that integrates community mental health and aged care services to address service fragmentation, using productive ageing and recovery principles to involve older people as peer supporters to address human resource issue.Methods/design: This is a non-randomised controlled trial examining the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the "Jockey Club Holistic Support Project for Elderly Mental Wellness" (JC JoyAge) model versus care as usual (CAU) in community aged care and community mental health service units in 12 months. Older people aged 60 years and over with mild to moderate depressive symptoms or risk factors for developing depression will be included. JoyAge service users will receive group-based activities and psychoeducation, low-intensity psychotherapy, or high-intensity psychotherapy according to the stepped care protocol in addition to usual community mental health or aged care, with support from an older peer supporter. The primary clinical outcome, depressive symptoms, and secondary outcomes, self-harm risk, anxiety symptoms, and loneliness, will be measured with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Self-Harm Inventory, Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale (GAD-7), and UCLA Loneliness 3-item scale (UCLA-3) respectively. Cost-effectiveness analysis will assess health-related quality of life using the EQ-5D-5L and service utilisation using the Client Service Receipt Inventory (CSRI). We use multilevel linear mixed models to compare outcomes change between groups and calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in terms of quality-adjusted life years.Discussion: This study will provide evidence about outcomes for older persons with mental health needs receiving collaborative stepped care service without silos and with trained young-old volunteers to support engagement, treatment, and transitions. Cost-effectiveness findings from this study will inform resource allocation in this under-treated population.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03593889. Registered on 20 July 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Current pharmacological and behavioral treatment options for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are limited, motivating a search for alternative therapies that might slow the progression of cognitive decline.Objective: We investigated the effectiveness of a cognition-focused mindfulness-based intervention.Methods: An open-label, three arm randomized controlled trial was conducted at a public tertiary medical center. Older persons (ages 45-75; N = 76) diagnosed with MCI were recruited and randomized into either mindfulness-based training (MBT), cognitive rehabilitation therapy (CRT), or treatment as usual (TAU). Participants in the intervention arms received 8 weekly 2-h sessions delivered in a group setting and engaged in home practice. Primary outcomes measures included changes in index scores for attention, immediate memory, and delayed memory as measured using the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS). Depression was a secondary outcome.Results: Using intent-to-treat analysis, we found that participants receiving MBT showed significant improvements in global cognition (d = 0.26; [95%CI 0.03-0.56]) and delayed memory (d = 0.36; [95%CI 0.17-0.57]), with significantly greater improvements in delayed memory than CRT (ηp2 = 0.10). However, there was no benefit of MBT over TAU. No change in depression was observed in the MBT group. Reductions in depression were associated with improvements in cognitive functioning in the MBT group only.Conclusion: Our results suggest that a cognition-focused MBT did not improve cognitive functioning in MCI patients substantially more than spontaneous reversion rates, possibly as mood symptoms were not significantly alleviated in this group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a local ablation technique utilizing high voltage, low energy direct current to create nanopores in cell membrane which disrupt homeostasis and leads to cell death. Previous reports have suggested IRE may have a role in treating borderline resectable and unresectable Stage 3 pancreatic tumors.Methods: Patients with Stage 3 pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) will be enrolled in either a randomized, controlled, multicenter trial (RCT) or a multicenter registry study. Subjects enrolled in the RCT must have no evidence of disease progression after 3 months of modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX) treatment prior to being randomization to either a control or IRE arm. Post-induction and post-IRE treatment for the control and IRE arms, respectively, will be left to the discretion of the treating physician. The RCT will enroll 528 subjects with 264 per arm and include up to 15 sites. All subjects will be followed for at least 24 months or until death. The registry study will include two cohorts of patients with Stage 3 PDAC, patients who received institutional standard of care (SOC) alone and those treated with IRE in addition to SOC. Both cohorts will be required to have undergone at least 3 months of SOC without progression prior to enrollment. The registry study will enroll 532 patients with 266 patients in each arm. All patients will be followed for at least 24 months or until death. The primary efficacy endpoint for both studies will be overall survival (OS). Co-primary safety endpoints will be 1) time from randomization or enrollment in the registry to death or new onset of Grade 4 adverse event (AE), and (2 high-grade complications defined as any AE or serious AE (SAE) with a CTCAE v5.0 grade of 3 or higher. Secondary endpoints will include progression-free survival, cancer-related pain, quality of life, and procedure-related pain for the IRE arm only.Discussion: These studies are intended to provide Level 1 clinical evidence and real-world data demonstrating the clinical utility and safety of the use of IRE in combination with chemotherapy in patients with Stage 3 PDAC.Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03899636 and NCT03899649. Registered April 2, 2019. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) trial G180278 approved on May 3, 2019. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]