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]

Background: Melanoma incidence has quadrupled since 1970 and melanoma is now the second most common cancer in individuals under 50. Targeted immunotherapies for melanoma now potentially enable long-term remission even in advanced melanoma, but these melanoma survivors require ongoing surveillance, with implications for NHS resources and significant social and psychological consequences for patients. Total skin self-examination (TSSE) can detect recurrence earlier and improve clinical outcomes but is underperformed in the UK. To support survivors, the Achieving Self-directed Integrated Cancer Aftercare (ASICA) intervention was developed to prompt and improve TSSE performance, with subsequent reporting of concerns and submission of skin photos to a Dermatology Nurse Practitioner (DNP). ASICA was delivered as a randomized pilot trial.Methods: This paper reports on process evaluation. Data on participants' demographics and the concerns they reported during the trial were tabulated and displayed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS. We explored which participants used ASICA, and how frequently, to report any skin concerns. We also determined how the interactions had worked in terms of quality of skin photographs submitted, clinical assessments made by the DNP, and the assessments and decisions made for each concern. Finally, we explored significant events occurring during the trial. Data on participants' demographics and the concerns they reported during the trial were tabulated and displayed using SPSS. A semi-structured interview was undertaken with the DNP to gain perspective on the range of concerns presented and how they were resolved.Results: Of 121 recruited melanoma patients receiving ASICA for 12 months, 69 participants submitted a total of 123 reports detailing 189 separate skin-related concerns and including 188 skin photographs. Where participants fully complied with follow-up by the DNP, concerns were usually resolved remotely, but 19 (10.1%) were seen at a secondary care clinic and 14 (7.4%) referred to their GP. 49 (25.9%) of concerns were not completely resolved due to partial non-compliance with DNP follow-up.Conclusion: Melanoma patients randomized to the ASICA intervention were able to report skin-related concerns that could be resolved remotely through interaction with a DNP. Feasibility issues highlighted by ASICA will support further development and optimization of this digital tool.Trial Registration: Clinical Trials.gov , NCT03328247 . Registered on 1 November 2017. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Age, sex, and type of fracture have traditionally been described as prognostic factors for proximal humeral fractures (PHFs). Some non-medical patient-related factors may play a role in the outcome. This paper evaluates the association of comorbidities and socioeconomic factors with clinical outcomes for PHF.Methods: A total of 217 patients with PHF were evaluated according to Neer's classification with X-ray. Comorbidities were assessed through the Charlson comorbidity index and, non-medical patient-related factors were determined with a 52-item questionnaire concerning personal behaviors such as social activities, family support, economic solvency, and leisure-time activities. The clinical outcome was assessed with the Constant-Murley Score (CMS), with a minimum 1-year follow-up. The minimal clinically relevant difference for the CMS was set at 10 points. A multivariable analysis was performed to adjust for comorbidities and non-medical patient-related factors, such as age, sex, fracture classification, and treatment.Results: One hundred and eighty-three patients completed the initial research protocol, while 126 of them completed the 1-year follow-up. The mean age was 71.6 years (SD ± 13.3), and 79.3% of the patients were women. In the bivariable analysis, age and comorbidities were correlated with the CMS (correlation coefficient: - 0.34 [- 0.49, 0.17] and 0.35 [0.18, 0.50], respectively), as well as non-medical patient-related factors and the fracture pattern (p value ANOVA < 0.001). In the multivariable regression model, the effects of considering oneself socially active, without economic problems, and self-sufficient were associated with a higher CMS than the effect of the fracture pattern (beta coefficient: 11.69 [6.09-17.30], 15.54 [8.32-22.75], and 10.61 [3.34-17.88], respectively).Conclusion: Socioeconomic status had a higher impact on functional outcomes than fracture pattern in patients with PHF. [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]

Clinical relevance: Home-based videogame treatments are increasingly popular for amblyopia treatment. However, at-home treatments tend to be done in short sessions and with frequent disruptions, which may reduce the effectiveness of binocular visual stimulation. These treatment adherence patterns need to be accounted for when considering dose-response relationships and treatment effectiveness.Background: Home-based videogame treatments are increasingly being used for various sensory conditions, including amblyopia ('lazy eye'), but treatment adherence continues to limit success. To examine detailed behavioural patterns associated with home-based videogame treatment, we analysed in detail the videogame adherence data from the Binocular tReatment of Amblyopia with VideOgames (BRAVO) clinical trial (ACTRN12613001004752).Methods: Children (7-12 years), teenagers (13-17 years) and adults (≥ 18 years) with unilateral amblyopia were loaned iPod Touch devices with either an active treatment or placebo videogame and instructed to play for a total of 1-2 hours/day for six weeks at home. Objectively-recorded adherence data from device software were used to analyse adherence patterns such as session length, daily distribution of gameplay, use of the pause function, and differences between age groups. Objectively-recorded adherence was also compared to subjectively-reported adherence from paper-based diaries.Results: One hundred and five of the 115 randomised participants completed six weeks of videogame training. Average adherence was 65% (SD 37%) of the minimum hours prescribed. Game training was generally performed in short sessions (mean 21.5, SD 11.2 minutes), mostly in the evening, with frequent pauses (median every 4.1 minutes, IQR 6.1). Children played in significantly shorter sessions and paused more frequently than older age groups (p < 0.0001). Participants tended to over-report adherence in subjective diaries compared to objectively-recorded gameplay time.Conclusion: Adherence to home-based videogame treatment was characterised by short sessions interspersed with frequent pauses, suggesting regular disengagement. This complicates dose-response calculations and may interfere with the effectiveness of treatments like binocular treatments for amblyopia, which require sustained visual stimulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]

Background: Although tenotomy and tenodesis are frequently used for long head of the biceps tendon lesions, controversies remain as to which technique is superior regarding pain, functionality, complications, and cosmetic appearance.Questions/purposes: (1) For long head of biceps tendon lesions, does tenotomy or tenodesis result in greater improvements in VAS score for pain? (2) Which approach has superior results when evaluating function outcome (Constant) scores? (3) Does tenotomy or tenodesis have fewer complications? (4) Does tenotomy or tenodesis result in better cosmesis (Popeye sign)?Methods: A systematic review was performed in the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and Literatura Latino Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (LILACS) using the keywords "long head of the biceps tendon," "biceps tenodesis," and "tenotomy." We completed the search in June 2020. The inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials and quasirandomized controlled trials that investigated tenodesis and tenotomy with no language restriction and evaluation of adult patients who presented with a long head of the biceps tendon lesion, associated with other lesions or not, without previous shoulder surgeries and who had no response to nonoperative treatment. The initial search yielded 239 studies, 40 of which were duplicates. We assessed the titles and abstracts of 199 articles and excluded all studies that were not randomized controlled trials (literature reviews) or that compared different techniques. We assessed the full text of 14 articles and excluded the ones that were protocols and cohort studies. We evaluated the risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. We included eight studies in this systematic review and meta-analysis, with a total of 615 participants, 306 of whom were treated with tenotomy and 309 with tenodesis. The median duration of follow-up was 2 years. Overall, the included studies had a low risk of bias. The complications evaluated were adhesive capsulitis, biceps brachii tear, cramps, and a subsequent second surgical procedure. We used a random model in this meta-analysis so that we could generalize the results beyond the included studies. In this study, we only reported differences between the groups if they were both statistically valid and larger than the minimum clinically important difference (MCID).Results: Comparing tenotomy and tenodesis, we observed no difference between the groups regarding pain in the long term (mean difference 0.25 [95% confidence interval -0.29 to 0.80]; p = 0.36). There was no difference in Constant score in the long-term (mean difference -1.45 [95% CI -2.96 to 0.06]; p = 0.06). There were no differences when evaluating for major complications (odds ratio 1.37 [95% CI 0.29 to 6.56]; p = 0.70). There were not enough papers evaluating adhesive capsulitis, cramping, and risk of revision surgery. Popeye sign was more frequent in the tenotomy group than in the tenodesis group (OR 4.70 [95% CI 2.71 to 8.17]; p < 0.001).Conclusion: This systematic review demonstrated that tenotomy and tenodesis offer satisfactory treatment for long head of the biceps tendon lesions. In terms of pain improvement and Constant score, there was no difference between the techniques, but patients undergoing tenotomy have worse cosmetic results. Therefore, surgeons should choose the technique based on their skills and the patient's expectations of surgery, such as cosmesis and time to recovery. More studies are needed to evaluate complications such as adhesive capsulitis and cramping, as well as to compare duration of surgery and recovery time for each technique.Level Of Evidence: Level I, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To evaluate an innovative paediatric neurorehabilitation model in relation to improving quality of neurorehabilitation and reducing length of stay (LOS) for children with acquired brain injury.Method: A process evaluation approach was conducted in line with Medical Research Council evaluation of complex interventions guidance. Analysis was conducted on routinely collected patient data from 2017 to 2018, including LOS and family feedback. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used for quantitative analysis and qualitative data was analysed thematically.Results: Outcomes for 70 children (0-16y, median age 5y, IQR 1-11y, 46 males, 24 females) referred to the service indicated improved function and reduced complexity of need. The mean LOS was 10.6 days compared to baseline mean LOS of 41 days (2011-2012). High satisfaction from the families was recorded; however, ongoing needs and service gaps regarding long-term support were identified.Interpretation: This service model is effective in delivering quality paediatric neurorehabilitation, demonstrating a sustained impact on LOS, and positive patient outcome data and family feedback for this group of patients. What this paper adds Investment in early intensive neurorehabilitation and supported discharge impacts length of stay (LOS) for children with acquired brain injury. Early intensive neurorehabilitation and supported discharge is effective. This is demonstrated by a sustained reduction in LOS, positive patient outcomes, and family feedback. [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]